This was from an article on March 31st -
"FCC chairman Kevin Martin had previously said he hoped the Commission could act on the deal before the end of March, but recently said that was unlikely. However, Martin added that the agency would have a decision before the merger agreement expires in May."
Now it may not occur by then, but if it doesn't, Martin needs to answer some questions since his words and predictions of decisions are responsible for millions of shares exchanging hands between January and the present.
I don't believe the point was about holding one's word. I believe the more important point rcheroclix is making, is how deceptive it is for investors who are responding to direction given on the merger decision timeline. This is also true of the 180 day timeline, I thought it meant something more until it expired long ago with little or no comment (okay I'm one of the naive investors who followed it and paid for it, check out the stock price since NOvember after the timeline expired).
Well I'm hopeful - "Martin added that the agency would have a decision before the merger agreement expires in May."
That much more declarative than his other statements which would say he hoped, thought they might etc.
Would I be completely stunned if the weasal broke his word? No, but I think an explanation would definitely be in order and he might be treading on legal thin ice at that point. Shares have been bought on this man's predictions of a decision going back to January when he thought they might decide before the DOJ.
I'm sending out signed letters to my senator and house rep. on Monday. And I'm going to ask them both to look into this situation if Martin doesn't do something by May 1st. (they have to have a signed complaint from someone they represent to look into a federal agency - phone calls and emails don't suffice).
You are making some very good posts, rcheroclix.
Careful, there are a lot of slugs here who don't like people who post positive news.
Keep up the good work.
I'll second that
There has been so much back and forth about when there might be a decision I forgot about this previous statement from Martin.
Thanks for the reminder. Like most of us I have been anxiously waiting on a decision EITHER way.
We need to hold Martin to his word about May 1st. It's paraphraised in the article but it is not a maybe, it is definite line in the sand.
I thought this was funny -
Here's a time in December when Senators asked him to delay a vote on another issue and he refused...very inconsistant
What a prick, you've been on here posting since october 07,
Let me tell you. This guy has more id's than you can imagine. And when he really gets going they all come out of the woodwork. Out Of Control madness.