Can anyone put names to the ratings and earnings
estimates? Feel free to post, or to email me at
Number of brokers recommending
Months Ago . . . . . 0 . . . . 1 . . . . 2 . . . . 3
Strong Buy. . . . . . . 7 . . . . 7 . . . . 7 . . . .
Moderate Buy . . . . 9 . . . . 9 . . . . 8 . . . .
Hold . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . 3 . . . . 4 . . .
Moderate Sell . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 . . . .
0 . . . . 0
Strong Sell . . . . . . . . 0 . . .
. 0 . . . . 0 . . . . 0
Earnings Est. . . .
. . Q2 . . . Q 3 . . 2000 . . 2001
. . . . .35 . .40 . . 1.53 . . 1.87
. . . .35 . .39 . . 1.50 . . 1.80
. . . . .36 . .42 . . 1.56 . . 1.95
Year Ago . .
. . . . .29 . . . n/a . 1.24 . . 1.53
. . . 21.75% . n/a . 23.16% . 22.30
A.G. Edwards and Sons Inc.
ABN AMRO Inc.
America Securities LLC
CIBC World Markets
Suisse First Boston Corp.
Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Securities
Fahnestock and Co. Inc.
Goldman Sachs and Co.
J.W. Genesis Capital Markets
Lehman Brothers Inc.
Merrill Lynch and Co.
Stanley Dean Witter and Co.
S G Cowen Securities Corp.
Salomon Smith Barney
Tucker Anthony Cleary Gull
Blair and Co.
The correct form is: today's (this means
pertaining to today)
Incorrect form: todays (this is the
plural of today)
This is probably why you failed
Punctuation marks belong inside closing quotation marks,
like: "homework," not like "homework",
practice is only used by EuroTrash
While innovation is ordinarily commendable, your
coinage "quacky" is disallowed, unless it means "like the
sound of a duck" or "like an unlicensed medical
Psychiatric medicine has no treatments to offer for
"indicated" or generic disease. There is no scientific
evidence for this assertion. You need to check your
When mentioning the seasons of the year, it is
appropriate to capitalize. Thus, the "fall of Gulag" should
be the "Fall of Gulag" unless you mean the fall of
THE Gulag, which is almost literary. Either way,
another missed boat.
You must stop thinking of
yourself as "amended." You are probably OK except for a
few loose connections. The Constitution has been
amended, but of course one of those was so bad it had to
be unamended as well.
Stupidity is just one
thing. Not two things. So you need to write "the evil of
stupidity" not "the evils of stupidity."
You seem to
believe that there is something sinister in being
left-handed. There is no scientific evidence for this
Since "i_am_in_charge_here" as designated by Yahoo!, I
find in favor of slugeau.
However, I amend your
punishment, and commute your expulsion to a sentence in an
alternative school. There you will receive the special help
you need to be useful to yourself and others.
Again, you have demonstrated a mental condition
necessitating psychiatric help. Perhaps with todays
neurological advances, and knowledge of brain chemistry you
might one day find a way back to reality..
last post appears to be particularly agitated,
rambling on suspiciously about "failure to do homework",
followed by some quacky remark of "failing detention".
Your compulsive nature continues to be revealed when
you demand "understanding instructions" This remark
is most revealing, for it indicates obsession and
compulsion. Might I inquire WHOSE instructions must be
followed? Your present stage of mental illness continues to
delude rational thought, for you actually believe you
may "expel" offensive opinions from the message
Perhaps it is that longing for the good
old days before the fall of Gulag, when opinionated
dissenters and objectors were not only dismissed, thrown
into prisons, but tortured and annihilated as well.
Today, with the demise of the blatantly evil ones, the
Artful Dodgers remaining seek to evade, trash and
destroy. Like the past eight years in American politics
when the manipulators blamed right wing conspiracies
for errors of judgment, and a citizenry was left to
ponder the meaning of the word "is".
disturbing to the controlling element among us is todays
focus upon our FIRST great amendment, a living
breathing document that absolutely prohibits laws abridging
freedom of speech and press.
The evils of
stupidity befall those who believe that lefties leave as
their legacy anything other than a landscape devastated
by the litter of trashed individual freedom.
Again, you have failed to do your homework, and
you have failed detention.
The word is
"unalienable" not "inalienable" and it is from the Declaration
of Independence, not the Constitution.
makes both parts of your answer incorrect.
have failed to demonstrate that you can read, or
write, or understand simple instructions.
Accordingly you are expelled.
My comments regarding
the evils of stupidity stand. You represent precisely
what is endangering our vital liberties and
I remain yours in the eternal struggle to increase
people's equity and ROI.
Surely you jest?
The fact that left-wing
socialists in Britain are concerned about
child molesters, pediphiles, and perverts surprises me
not at all.
My comments regarding the evils of
socialism resulting in the erosion of personal and
individual liberty state precisely what is endangered in
Every action by government that restricts
personal freedom, whether in health care or education,
that dictates who shall receive what belongs to the
accomplishments of others, that redistributes the income of
others, that grants affirmative action to others on the
basis of favor, not ability, that gives-away placements
at select universities on basis of favor, is an
infringement on the rights of every citizen, thus
the threshold as to WHAT government is permitted to
remove from the citizenry. Most of these would NEVER be
found "constitutionally correct" by any rational
interpetation of what the founders intended. However, an
activist, socialist court removes personal rights so
unique inalienable rights are
You MUST for the protection of the First Amendment
Rights of the YAHOO poster, submit to the laboratory for
genetic testing. Hopefully, some treatment may enlighten
you as to the benefits of the fall of the wall in
Europe, and make lefties, whether Communists or
Socialists less welcome the world over.
Maybe you missed the news.
fighting in the UK against the proposals for email
surveillance are the left-wing SOCIALISTS you seem to think
want your dirty underwear, and CORPORATIONS, unlikely
allies you may think, but they understand the value of
confidentiality and privacy, too.
You are assigned to
detention until you do five current events homework
assignments that correctly understand stories from the
mainstream press. Five DIFFERENT stories.
Now go fix
the safety pin on your senior diaper and stop
annoying the competent adults.
These ARE conversations.
types fear freedom of internet conversations
particularly. The ability to communicate quickly and
efficiently stirs up deep agitation among those who would
suppress, claiming the public good or whatever, and they
will seek ways to curtail the criticisms and opinions
that threaten them.
Certain Americans of the
past also heeded warnings of danger, as an example
consider the freedom fighters of long ago. Paul Revere's
heroic ride comes to mind. I am sure many today would
consider Revere an hysterical freedom fighter, calling
warnings through the night, a radical seeking to overthrow
the robber tax and spenders. And replacing them with
the founders of individual liberty.
warnings may be issued instantly via internet, and your
rights in a free society to voice your concerns and
OPINIONS must be defended lest they become
Regarding Britain and e-mail intervention. This does not
surprise, for Socialism by its very nature restricts
personal and individual freedom.
I have always
believed the threat of suppression of liberties comes from
the left. You cannot tax, redistribute wealth,
control business, incorporate endless Government
controls, without penalizing basic individual freedoms.
Socialism is but the prelude to tyranny. Once a population
has been innoculated by the left to accept ever more
government control over the lives of the people, the basic
constitutional rights of individual freedoms are at risk. Always
remember not to let USA Government restrict your freedom
to voice outrage and opinion. Without fear.
As previously stated, I see
these msg boards as akin to conversations. They
constitute a new way of peaceful assembly. The words that
are thrown are just that - words that are thrown.
They are not sticks. They are not stones. The great
thing about these conversations is they can get heated,
but a fist-fight can't break out in cyberspace. Yup,
folks can voice opinions that, if they weren't
anonymous, they wouldn't dare utter. But, Americans do have
the right to peaceful assembly, and we do have the
right to express our opinions, especially in casual
Now, the simple truth is that anything posted on these
msg boards is OPINION, unless explicitly identified
as fact by the poster. Even then, it could well be
that the 'fact' is merely the poster's opinion. Yahoo!
recognizes that in their "Reminder" - Don't forget it:
"These messages are only the opinion of the poster, are
no substitute for your own research, and should not
be relied upon for trading or any other purpose."
That's all there is to it. Posters don't need
disclaimers - We're posting under a blanket disclaimer,
courtesy of Yahoo!
The censorship advocates would
have us accept that certain words or phrasing
constitutes CRIMINAL SPEECH on these boards. If a poster
writes that a certain public figure is a crook, we have
a CRIMINAL poster. If the poster writes that the
poster 'thinks' the public figure is a crook, the poster
is innocent of crime. Then we get into drawing lines
and we can't even agree on that. Just like profanity
is in the mind of the beholder, so is 'the line'
between criminal speech guilt and innocence.
the fact is that the first phasing is implicitly
opinion. The poster may not have written "I think" the
public figure is a crook, but when I read it, I know
it's the poster's opinion. We don't have to preface
every sentence w/IMO to avoid committing speech crimes.
This is abuncha nitpicking, fault-finding, legalistic
crap! And don't forget Yahoo!'s blanket
Personally, I don't care if a poster wants to claim that some
public figure is a convicted felon. Show the case # and
an abstract, and I might buy it. It's all in the
realm of rumor to me, anyway. That's what folks need to
understand about this unique new medium - You can't believe
anything pseudonymous posters write here. You do your own
DD, and accept the consequences for your own
investment decisions. That's how individual 'responsibility'
works. Reading a msg board doesn't constitute DD any
more than following the calls of Wall Street analysts
like a lemming.
Readers may enjoy Jon Katz's
interesting perspective from his most recent commentary at
The Freedom Forum where he suggests we have two 1st
Internet creates 'freer' place for First
"The danger of censorship in cultural media increases
in proportion to the degree to which one approaches
the winning of a mass audience."
- James Farrell
This is from Zacks:
BANC OF AMERICA_____ 6/29/00
GRUNTAL______ 6/28/00 _____OUTPERFORM
TUCKER ANTHONY_____ 6/23/00 _____STRONG
FAHNESTOCK_____ 5/31/00 _____BUY
WARBURG DILLON_____ 5/30/00
Morgan Stanley Dean
Report Dated 5/3/00
2000E = 1.53, 2001E = 1.80
Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette
EPS Estimates: 2000E = 1.51; 2001E = 1.89
No reasonable basis for their
So even if NY Slapp statutes are somehow found not
applicable(which I hold can not be denied applicable),[paraphasing
here a little]
the plaintiffs need to show they
had a reasonable basis for their claims.
JUST do not see any possibilty of "a reasonable basis
for their claims."
Just aint there
So i'll just fade away for awhile. For you who are
wondering I am not one of the ELN eleven (yet?), unless
they dont like me. I just drifted in with the SLAPP
going on summer vacation, but i'll
post some more in about 3 weeks.
GOOD LUCK ELN 11
Don't let the bastards wear you down.
someone please re-post that wonderful pic with the funny
picture with $1Million phrase of groovy baby, shagadelic