|
|
Post by archangle on Oct 6, 2005 15:42:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by whetstone on Oct 6, 2005 16:14:38 GMT -6
Nothing new. Same ol arguments. I believe this starts the clock on CMKX and something should happen before the 20th. I'm not concerned about revocation but I think things might be easier if something happens sooner than later.
If Leslie is acting, she plays the part of an indignant lawyer very well. The time for the CMKX Juggernaut is at hand. Let the feasting begin. I'm hungry. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by archangle on Oct 6, 2005 16:19:44 GMT -6
does thisa mean that urban can now tell all on the initial holders of the 4.9%?  |
|
|
|
Post by whetstone on Oct 6, 2005 16:25:56 GMT -6
does thisa mean that urban can now tell all on the initial holders of the 4.9%? I think Roger Glenn took care of that problem but UC hasn't been able to speak about anything since then. Maybe "imminently SOOn" - is that a legal phrase? - we'll know most of the story. |
|
|
|
Post by pjannetto on Oct 6, 2005 16:26:34 GMT -6
Seems to me that nothings really new. Sounds like the same correspondence they sent a couple of months ago. They're not giving an inch. What I don't understand is that we do have some good responses for some of the points they bring out. Why we don't use them and set the record straight, beats the crap out of me. There must be a good reason, but I can't think of any. I've been saying for the past six months that I think the company is provoking revocation. I hate to think this way, but their actions seem to be pointing in that direction. I hope I'm wrong, I guess we'll have to see how we respond. If we have a "Hail Mary Pass" in our playbook, we better use it now!
|
|
|
|
Post by pjannetto on Oct 6, 2005 16:35:08 GMT -6
If this thing is indeed event driven, maybe this is the event we've been waiting for. Ball is in your court Urban, let's make it count!
|
|
|
|
Post by archangle on Oct 6, 2005 17:00:28 GMT -6
remember that yes this is even driven  |
|
|
|
Post by oldman on Oct 6, 2005 17:30:51 GMT -6
That sounded like a broken record... they are probably too busy enforcing the SHO rules to spend too much time on it.  .....that was funny....just kidding folks...had you all there for a moment...enforcing SHO... . Man, I crack myself up sometimes. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by gosh on Oct 6, 2005 18:59:39 GMT -6
does thisa mean that urban can now tell all on the initial holders of the 4.9%? not until 1) we answer on the 20th 2) we get revoked 3) we appeal and go to federal court then and only then |
|
|
|
Post by omnisip on Oct 6, 2005 19:11:53 GMT -6
does thisa mean that urban can now tell all on the initial holders of the 4.9%? not until 1) we answer on the 20th 2) we get revoked 3) we appeal and go to federal court then and only then I don't think this can occur because it would lock the shareholders in like the shorts. This would make it a front page blunder exposing all of the truth. See my post: cmkxgroup.proboards49.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1128645107 |
|
|
|
Post by samadams on Oct 6, 2005 19:52:07 GMT -6
That sounded like a broken record... they are probably too busy enforcing the SHO rules to spend too much time on it. .....that was funny....just kidding folks...had you all there for a moment...enforcing SHO... . Man, I crack myself up sometimes. ;D Dude... You need to be on stage, you'll be big... Bigger then Larry The Cable Guy lol (oh yea.. check your speed... I found out this morning, I'm zippin' right along at 8 megs now)  |
|
|
|
Post by urbanswarrior on Oct 6, 2005 19:56:05 GMT -6
Seems to me that nothings really new. Sounds like the same correspondence they sent a couple of months ago. They're not giving an inch. What I don't understand is that we do have some good responses for some of the points they bring out. Why we don't use them and set the record straight, beats the crap out of me. There must be a good reason, but I can't think of any. I've been saying for the past six months that I think the company is provoking revocation. I hate to think this way, but their actions seem to be pointing in that direction. I hope I'm wrong, I guess we'll have to see how we respond. If we have a "Hail Mary Pass" in our playbook, we better use it now! Before the spider can lure the fly...It has to spin the web!! |
|
|
|
Post by oldman on Oct 6, 2005 20:16:42 GMT -6
That sounded like a broken record... they are probably too busy enforcing the SHO rules to spend too much time on it. .....that was funny....just kidding folks...had you all there for a moment...enforcing SHO... . Man, I crack myself up sometimes. ;D Dude... You need to be on stage, you'll be big... Bigger then Larry The Cable Guy lol (oh yea.. check your speed... I found out this morning, I'm zippin' right along at 8 megs now) Dude! ;D The SEC thing is something. 50,000 or so shareholders buy into a stock and then they start preaching how they want to protect shareholders. Why do I buy into the "things aren't what they seem"? Because at face value,... this is silly. (fyi...SamAdams has the misfortune of hearing my posts verbally and my never ending opinion, every time he sees me at work. PUT HIM IN YOUR PRAYERS...lol ) 8 megs?  I'm still at 1.1  I think my cable is naked shorted but Dumcast said all the customers that want their speed to increase say that and there is no such thing as naked shorted broadband....where is Mr. Patch when I need him? Ok...no more posts till I get some sleep.  |
|
|
|
Post by floyd on Oct 6, 2005 20:26:37 GMT -6
Seems to me that nothings really new. Sounds like the same correspondence they sent a couple of months ago. They're not giving an inch. What I don't understand is that we do have some good responses for some of the points they bring out. Why we don't use them and set the record straight, beats the crap out of me. There must be a good reason, but I can't think of any. I've been saying for the past six months that I think the company is provoking revocation. I hate to think this way, but their actions seem to be pointing in that direction. I hope I'm wrong, I guess we'll have to see how we respond. If we have a "Hail Mary Pass" in our playbook, we better use it now! The hail mary play doesn't have a good success ratio... lol Floyd |
|
|
|
Post by j on Oct 6, 2005 21:09:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by mineralsrus on Oct 7, 2005 3:59:16 GMT -6
good catch Lawyers and Politicians (most are lawyers) are atheletes when it comes to verbal gymnastics.
|
|
|
|
Post by troydian on Oct 7, 2005 7:48:31 GMT -6
arguendo
prep. Latin meaning "for the sake of argument," used by lawyers in the context of "assuming arguendo" that the facts were as the other party contends, but the law prevents the other side from prevailing. Example: "assuming arguendo" that the court finds our client, the defendant, was negligent, the other party (plaintiff) was so contributorily negligent he cannot recover damages. In short, the lawyer is not admitting anything, but wants to make a legal argument only. The word appears most commonly in appeals briefs.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocket147 on Oct 7, 2005 8:38:25 GMT -6
Doesn't look like Ms Hakala is part of any hidden agreements with CMKM, as was discussed.in the past. If she is, then she certainly has me fooled.
So, I am still expecting that CMKM is in great hands with UC and IBM, and that all is well.
Rocket
|
|
.....that was funny....just kidding folks...had you all there 
I'm still at 1.1 
