Of course the 'EPS' numbers you cite for 2003 were per quarter. Now the company, after years of immitating the Crossbow's marketing strategy, would love to make 67 cents in a year.
Naturally newcomers to the company have a vested interest in 'going for broke' on new markets. Sure it probably won't work out for shareholders, but we can slap them back into line with stories about how there's no alternative, the survival of the company, etc.
Management newcomers don't get much quick career credit for understanding what's really going on, they get credit for flashy viewgraphs, B-school buzzwords and 'key concepts.' As competent people quit in disgust, the kids will move up into the empty slots. That looks good on a resume, and by the time layoffs hit upper-middle management, those kids will be off to the next exciting opportunity.
You make some very good points. You very well may be right, however, do you ever consider that you might just be wrong as well? Just wondering if being wrong has even entered into your equation with regard to this issue.
Sure, I could easily be wrong. In this case I'm just agreeing with the other poster, but we could both be wrong.
If what you're really saying is that you're looking for more respect for your own posts, it's easy: do some research beyond the price and volume action for the day. Read the SEC filings and build some sort of a case for what you think the stock is worth.