For the last f**king time, moron.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin Green wrote:
> > "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:6%[email protected]...
> >
> >>>>Justin Green wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>You're right- I'm in a conspiracy with Verizon and Verizon Wireless to
> >>>>spread lies about Verizon. Verizon lies about it, Verizon Wireless
lies
> >>>>about it, and I lie about it. I just wonder how big the **** stain is
> >>>>that you're sitting in.
> >>>>
> >>>>I've told you why they don't file- that crack pipe in your right hand
is
> >>>>playing havoc with your memory.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>No you didn't. Your explanation was simply WRONG.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I know- I've been wrong about everything (so is Verizon, obviously)
> >>
> >
> >
> > Why yes, thanks for finally admitting you're wrong.
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>>And to really jog your memory, I
> >>>>originally was pointing out that VZ Wireless was not a 'private
> >>>>comapny', but was in fact owned (in part) by Verizon.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>It is owned in part by VZ. But it is private. Besides being a dumbass
> >>>working at McDonalds, that's the reason you can't go to a broker and
buy
> >
> > an
> >
> >>>interest in Cellco. You agree that Cellco doesn't have shares
> >
> > outstanding,
> >
> >>>or shares at all for that matter, right?
> >>>
> >>
> >>You have me confused with your smarter brother- he's the one in your
> >>family who qualifed for the McDonalds job. Put your keyboard away and
> >>go to bed- Mommy says you need your beauty sleep. You can't buy AOL
> >>stock anymore either- it is now AOL/Time Warner as a result of their
> >>merger. Is AOL a private Company? The AOL corporate entities still do
> >>business. Your logic sucks- just admit defeat and give up.
> >
> >
> > No one in my family is as dumb as you. Not even Spot, the family dog.
> > Nah, you're wrong. Please tell me why you can't buy stock in Cellco.
Both
> > reasons. There are two.
> >
> >
> >>>>I believe that
> >>>>has been done with information from both entities. You can ask for
all
> >>>>of the clarification you want. I would suggest you do some research
at
> >>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
> >>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Again, explain why the partnership agreement is "wrong" according to
> >
> > you.
> >
> >>I never said the partnership agreement was wrong- it is quite solid, as
> >>a matter of fact. You are just trying to read things into it that not
> >>only are wrong, but don't make any sense. Parent corporations can make
> >>a business deal using any of the business entities it has at its
> >>disposal. You really need to brush up on these things- this is Business
> >>101 stuff.
> >
> >
> > So I'm reading into the agreement that it is owned by several PRIVATE
> > companies?
> >
> > Oh my God you are stupid.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Who said they were companies?


I did, and they are. Companies file with the SEC, not divisions that are
part of a larger entity. You understand the difference between a division
that is not a separate entity and one that is, right?

---

› See More: For the last f**king time, moron.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin Green wrote:
> > "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:6%[email protected]...
> >
> >>>>Justin Green wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>You're right- I'm in a conspiracy with Verizon and Verizon Wireless to
> >>>>spread lies about Verizon. Verizon lies about it, Verizon Wireless
lies
> >>>>about it, and I lie about it. I just wonder how big the **** stain is
> >>>>that you're sitting in.
> >>>>
> >>>>I've told you why they don't file- that crack pipe in your right hand
is
> >>>>playing havoc with your memory.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>No you didn't. Your explanation was simply WRONG.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I know- I've been wrong about everything (so is Verizon, obviously)
> >>
> >
> >
> > Why yes, thanks for finally admitting you're wrong.
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>>And to really jog your memory, I
> >>>>originally was pointing out that VZ Wireless was not a 'private
> >>>>comapny', but was in fact owned (in part) by Verizon.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>It is owned in part by VZ. But it is private. Besides being a dumbass
> >>>working at McDonalds, that's the reason you can't go to a broker and
buy
> >
> > an
> >
> >>>interest in Cellco. You agree that Cellco doesn't have shares
> >
> > outstanding,
> >
> >>>or shares at all for that matter, right?
> >>>
> >>
> >>You have me confused with your smarter brother- he's the one in your
> >>family who qualifed for the McDonalds job. Put your keyboard away and
> >>go to bed- Mommy says you need your beauty sleep. You can't buy AOL
> >>stock anymore either- it is now AOL/Time Warner as a result of their
> >>merger. Is AOL a private Company? The AOL corporate entities still do
> >>business. Your logic sucks- just admit defeat and give up.
> >
> >
> > No one in my family is as dumb as you. Not even Spot, the family dog.
> > Nah, you're wrong. Please tell me why you can't buy stock in Cellco.
Both
> > reasons. There are two.
> >
> >
> >>>>I believe that
> >>>>has been done with information from both entities. You can ask for
all
> >>>>of the clarification you want. I would suggest you do some research
at
> >>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
> >>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Again, explain why the partnership agreement is "wrong" according to
> >
> > you.
> >
> >>I never said the partnership agreement was wrong- it is quite solid, as
> >>a matter of fact. You are just trying to read things into it that not
> >>only are wrong, but don't make any sense. Parent corporations can make
> >>a business deal using any of the business entities it has at its
> >>disposal. You really need to brush up on these things- this is Business
> >>101 stuff.
> >
> >
> > So I'm reading into the agreement that it is owned by several PRIVATE
> > companies?
> >
> > Oh my God you are stupid.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Who said they were companies?


I did, and they are. Companies file with the SEC, not divisions that are
part of a larger entity. You understand the difference between a division
that is not a separate entity and one that is, right?

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest you do some research at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
>>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess Cellco Partnership's lawyers and accountants need to brush up,
>>>
>>>too,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>as they still think that Cellco is owned by severeal entities,
>
> including
>
>>>>>Bell Atlantic Cellular Holdings.
>>>>>
>>>>>Or, you could actually explain the reason that there are several
>>>
>>>entities
>>>
>>>
>>>>>listed on the amended partnership agreement that don't file SEC
>
> reports.
>
>>>>>And they ARE separate entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>Divisions, in the strict sense of the word, like you use it, does not
>>>
>>>have
>>>
>>>
>>>>>LLC, LP, or Inc., behind their names. When they do, rest assured it is
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>
>>>>>separate entity, which COULD BE owned by another entity.
>>>>>
>>>>>Are you really this stupid in real life?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No- I tried 'dumbing down' to help you understand, but I obviously have
>>>>a few more steps down to take to accomplish this.
>>>>
>>>>My final quote from Verizon Wireless, taken directly from their website.
>>>>
>>>> Parent Companies
>>>>A Fortune 10 company, Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) is one of the
>>>>world's leading providers of communications services. Verizon companies
>>>>are the largest providers of wireline and wireless communications in the
>>>>United States, with 136.6 million access line equivalents and 33.3
>>>>million Verizon Wireless customers. Verizon is the third largest
>>>>long-distance carrier for U.S. consumers, with 13.2 million
>>>>long-distance lines, and the company is also the largest directory
>>>>publisher in the world, as measured by directory titles and circulation.
>>>>With more than $67 billion in annual revenues and 227,000 employees,
>>>>Verizon's global presence extends to the Americas, Europe, Asia and the
>>>>Pacific. For more information on Verizon, visit www.verizon.com.
>>>>Vodafone is the world's largest mobile operator with over 112.5m
>>>>proportionate customers worldwide and equity interests in 28 countries
>>>>and Partner Networks in a further 7 countries.
>>>>www.vodafone.com
>>>>
>>>>Your beef is not with me, it is with your beloved '(not) private
>>>>company'. They are misinforming everybody about their relationship with
>>>>Verizon. If you reaaly want to get an explanation form the horse'
>>>>mouth, check out page 5 of the Press Kit on Verizon Wireless' site:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> http://www.verizonwireless.com/pdfs/...skit7-1-03.pdf
>
>>>>Read the portions from February to June 30, 2000. It outlines quite
>>>>clearly how the merger swallowed up all of the partnership entities.
>>>>
>>>>If you have any further concerns, you better contact VZ Wireless- after
>>>>all, I am only provideing what they have said. THey must be lying.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Again, answer the ****ing questions. You can't. Why? Because you are
>>>absolutely a crack smoking moron.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>OK- R e a l s l o w t h i s t i m e :
>>
>>1. Click the link to the press kit I provided (its the blue thingy).
>>Lucky for you, this won't require typing with both hands- I'd hate to
>>interrupt your 'private moment'.
>>2. Read the press kit or any one of the many sources I have referenced
>> by hyperlink, not because "I said so" (I would recommend having Mommy
>>read it to you if the words are too big)
>>3. Take up your concerns with the corporate liars- I only repeat their
>>information.
>>
>>And do me one more favor- come to the table with some facts next time.
>
>
> I did. You refuse to read the sources.
>
>
>>Your questions are meaningless, and if you were correct, you'd be able
>>to give twenty verifiable sources for every one I've provided (and I can
>>provide more if need be).
>
>
> My questions are meaningless to you, because you're too stupid to answer
> them.
>
>
>>Now go rest up- I hear your favorite episode of Teletubbies is on in the
>>morning, but you'll have to miss your morning nap.
>
>
> Try answering the questions.
>
>
No- you seemed convinced that either the agreement or the statements by
Verizon are false. Go to the SEC- you are a genius and just uncovered
the biggest corporate scandal of the year. But when you talk to them-
take the binkie out of your mouth. It makes you mumble and drool.

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest you do some research at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
>>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess Cellco Partnership's lawyers and accountants need to brush up,
>>>
>>>too,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>as they still think that Cellco is owned by severeal entities,
>
> including
>
>>>>>Bell Atlantic Cellular Holdings.
>>>>>
>>>>>Or, you could actually explain the reason that there are several
>>>
>>>entities
>>>
>>>
>>>>>listed on the amended partnership agreement that don't file SEC
>
> reports.
>
>>>>>And they ARE separate entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>Divisions, in the strict sense of the word, like you use it, does not
>>>
>>>have
>>>
>>>
>>>>>LLC, LP, or Inc., behind their names. When they do, rest assured it is
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>
>>>>>separate entity, which COULD BE owned by another entity.
>>>>>
>>>>>Are you really this stupid in real life?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No- I tried 'dumbing down' to help you understand, but I obviously have
>>>>a few more steps down to take to accomplish this.
>>>>
>>>>My final quote from Verizon Wireless, taken directly from their website.
>>>>
>>>> Parent Companies
>>>>A Fortune 10 company, Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) is one of the
>>>>world's leading providers of communications services. Verizon companies
>>>>are the largest providers of wireline and wireless communications in the
>>>>United States, with 136.6 million access line equivalents and 33.3
>>>>million Verizon Wireless customers. Verizon is the third largest
>>>>long-distance carrier for U.S. consumers, with 13.2 million
>>>>long-distance lines, and the company is also the largest directory
>>>>publisher in the world, as measured by directory titles and circulation.
>>>>With more than $67 billion in annual revenues and 227,000 employees,
>>>>Verizon's global presence extends to the Americas, Europe, Asia and the
>>>>Pacific. For more information on Verizon, visit www.verizon.com.
>>>>Vodafone is the world's largest mobile operator with over 112.5m
>>>>proportionate customers worldwide and equity interests in 28 countries
>>>>and Partner Networks in a further 7 countries.
>>>>www.vodafone.com
>>>>
>>>>Your beef is not with me, it is with your beloved '(not) private
>>>>company'. They are misinforming everybody about their relationship with
>>>>Verizon. If you reaaly want to get an explanation form the horse'
>>>>mouth, check out page 5 of the Press Kit on Verizon Wireless' site:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> http://www.verizonwireless.com/pdfs/...skit7-1-03.pdf
>
>>>>Read the portions from February to June 30, 2000. It outlines quite
>>>>clearly how the merger swallowed up all of the partnership entities.
>>>>
>>>>If you have any further concerns, you better contact VZ Wireless- after
>>>>all, I am only provideing what they have said. THey must be lying.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Again, answer the ****ing questions. You can't. Why? Because you are
>>>absolutely a crack smoking moron.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>OK- R e a l s l o w t h i s t i m e :
>>
>>1. Click the link to the press kit I provided (its the blue thingy).
>>Lucky for you, this won't require typing with both hands- I'd hate to
>>interrupt your 'private moment'.
>>2. Read the press kit or any one of the many sources I have referenced
>> by hyperlink, not because "I said so" (I would recommend having Mommy
>>read it to you if the words are too big)
>>3. Take up your concerns with the corporate liars- I only repeat their
>>information.
>>
>>And do me one more favor- come to the table with some facts next time.
>
>
> I did. You refuse to read the sources.
>
>
>>Your questions are meaningless, and if you were correct, you'd be able
>>to give twenty verifiable sources for every one I've provided (and I can
>>provide more if need be).
>
>
> My questions are meaningless to you, because you're too stupid to answer
> them.
>
>
>>Now go rest up- I hear your favorite episode of Teletubbies is on in the
>>morning, but you'll have to miss your morning nap.
>
>
> Try answering the questions.
>
>
No- you seemed convinced that either the agreement or the statements by
Verizon are false. Go to the SEC- you are a genius and just uncovered
the biggest corporate scandal of the year. But when you talk to them-
take the binkie out of your mouth. It makes you mumble and drool.

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:6%[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're right- I'm in a conspiracy with Verizon and Verizon Wireless to
>>>>>>spread lies about Verizon. Verizon lies about it, Verizon Wireless
>
> lies
>
>>>>>>about it, and I lie about it. I just wonder how big the **** stain is
>>>>>>that you're sitting in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I've told you why they don't file- that crack pipe in your right hand
>
> is
>
>>>>>>playing havoc with your memory.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No you didn't. Your explanation was simply WRONG.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I know- I've been wrong about everything (so is Verizon, obviously)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Why yes, thanks for finally admitting you're wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>And to really jog your memory, I
>>>>>>originally was pointing out that VZ Wireless was not a 'private
>>>>>>comapny', but was in fact owned (in part) by Verizon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It is owned in part by VZ. But it is private. Besides being a dumbass
>>>>>working at McDonalds, that's the reason you can't go to a broker and
>
> buy
>
>>>an
>>>
>>>
>>>>>interest in Cellco. You agree that Cellco doesn't have shares
>>>
>>>outstanding,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>or shares at all for that matter, right?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You have me confused with your smarter brother- he's the one in your
>>>>family who qualifed for the McDonalds job. Put your keyboard away and
>>>>go to bed- Mommy says you need your beauty sleep. You can't buy AOL
>>>>stock anymore either- it is now AOL/Time Warner as a result of their
>>>>merger. Is AOL a private Company? The AOL corporate entities still do
>>>>business. Your logic sucks- just admit defeat and give up.
>>>
>>>
>>>No one in my family is as dumb as you. Not even Spot, the family dog.
>>>Nah, you're wrong. Please tell me why you can't buy stock in Cellco.
>
> Both
>
>>>reasons. There are two.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>I believe that
>>>>>>has been done with information from both entities. You can ask for
>
> all
>
>>>>>>of the clarification you want. I would suggest you do some research
>
> at
>
>>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
>>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Again, explain why the partnership agreement is "wrong" according to
>>>
>>>you.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I never said the partnership agreement was wrong- it is quite solid, as
>>>>a matter of fact. You are just trying to read things into it that not
>>>>only are wrong, but don't make any sense. Parent corporations can make
>>>>a business deal using any of the business entities it has at its
>>>>disposal. You really need to brush up on these things- this is Business
>>>>101 stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>>So I'm reading into the agreement that it is owned by several PRIVATE
>>>companies?
>>>
>>>Oh my God you are stupid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Who said they were companies?
>
>
>
> I did, and they are. Companies file with the SEC, not divisions that are
> part of a larger entity. You understand the difference between a division
> that is not a separate entity and one that is, right?
>
>
What source do have to verify that they are companies and not part of
the VerizonCorporate structure? I've provided my information (or
other's information, to be more precise). Your turn to provide facts
(however unlikely that is).

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:6%[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're right- I'm in a conspiracy with Verizon and Verizon Wireless to
>>>>>>spread lies about Verizon. Verizon lies about it, Verizon Wireless
>
> lies
>
>>>>>>about it, and I lie about it. I just wonder how big the **** stain is
>>>>>>that you're sitting in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I've told you why they don't file- that crack pipe in your right hand
>
> is
>
>>>>>>playing havoc with your memory.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No you didn't. Your explanation was simply WRONG.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I know- I've been wrong about everything (so is Verizon, obviously)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Why yes, thanks for finally admitting you're wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>And to really jog your memory, I
>>>>>>originally was pointing out that VZ Wireless was not a 'private
>>>>>>comapny', but was in fact owned (in part) by Verizon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It is owned in part by VZ. But it is private. Besides being a dumbass
>>>>>working at McDonalds, that's the reason you can't go to a broker and
>
> buy
>
>>>an
>>>
>>>
>>>>>interest in Cellco. You agree that Cellco doesn't have shares
>>>
>>>outstanding,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>or shares at all for that matter, right?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You have me confused with your smarter brother- he's the one in your
>>>>family who qualifed for the McDonalds job. Put your keyboard away and
>>>>go to bed- Mommy says you need your beauty sleep. You can't buy AOL
>>>>stock anymore either- it is now AOL/Time Warner as a result of their
>>>>merger. Is AOL a private Company? The AOL corporate entities still do
>>>>business. Your logic sucks- just admit defeat and give up.
>>>
>>>
>>>No one in my family is as dumb as you. Not even Spot, the family dog.
>>>Nah, you're wrong. Please tell me why you can't buy stock in Cellco.
>
> Both
>
>>>reasons. There are two.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>I believe that
>>>>>>has been done with information from both entities. You can ask for
>
> all
>
>>>>>>of the clarification you want. I would suggest you do some research
>
> at
>
>>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You obviously
>>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Again, explain why the partnership agreement is "wrong" according to
>>>
>>>you.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I never said the partnership agreement was wrong- it is quite solid, as
>>>>a matter of fact. You are just trying to read things into it that not
>>>>only are wrong, but don't make any sense. Parent corporations can make
>>>>a business deal using any of the business entities it has at its
>>>>disposal. You really need to brush up on these things- this is Business
>>>>101 stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>>So I'm reading into the agreement that it is owned by several PRIVATE
>>>companies?
>>>
>>>Oh my God you are stupid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Who said they were companies?
>
>
>
> I did, and they are. Companies file with the SEC, not divisions that are
> part of a larger entity. You understand the difference between a division
> that is not a separate entity and one that is, right?
>
>
What source do have to verify that they are companies and not part of
the VerizonCorporate structure? I've provided my information (or
other's information, to be more precise). Your turn to provide facts
(however unlikely that is).

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Yeah, I went there and it offered no proof to counter the statements I
>>>>>>made above. Learn to get the facts- I tire of your rants that come
>
> only
>
>>>>>>from you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Please tell me how those entities entered into a partnership agreement
>>>
>>>if
>>>
>>>
>>>>>they were divisions of another company and no longer separate entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's a quote from the Agreement, AS FILED WITH THE SEC:
>>>>>
>>>>>WHEREAS, the undersigned constitute all of the current parties to that
>>>>>certain Cellco Partnership Amended and Restated Partnership Agreement
>>>
>>>dated
>>>
>>>
>>>>>as of April 3, 2000 by and among the members of the Bell Atlantic Group
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the members of the Vodafone Group (as further amended as of July 10,
>>>
>>>2000,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the "Partnership Agreement"), it being the case that prior to the date
>>>>>hereof (i) AirTouch Paging, then a member of the Vodafone Group, was
>>>
>>>merged
>>>
>>>
>>>>>with and into JV PartnerCo, LLC, another member of the Vodafone Group,
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>(ii) GTE Wireless of the South Incorporated, then a member of the Bell
>>>>>Atlantic Group, was merged with and into GTE Wireless Incorporated,
>>>
>>>another
>>>
>>>
>>>>>member of the Bell Atlantic Group; and...
>>>>>
>>>>>See? They are STILL separate legal entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Another article from Dow Jones, written today.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> http://money.cnn.com/services/ticker...9_FORTUNE5.htm
>
>>>>the 6th paragraph:
>>>>
>>>>" Verizon Wireless, which has 34.6 million customers, is a joint venture
>>>>of Verizon Communications (VZ) and Vodafone Group PLC (VOD)."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Just in case you thought the first article was a typo.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, you dolt, do you really think that the Dow Jones is going to list
>>>seperately the partners of Cellco? LOOK AT THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.
>>>
>>>God, it must be nice to be an 8 year old with internet access.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Give up, stupid- you are going to crap yourself when you read the other
>>posts I just sent. VZ Wireless even admits in their press releases they
>>are owned by Verizon. Your asttempt at circular logic just bit you in
>>the ass.
>
>
>
> I did crap after I read that. And the turd in the pot could debate better
> than you.
>
>
they say the next generation is always smarter- I guess the turd proved
that true.

Justin Green wrote:
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>
>>Justin Green wrote:
>>
>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Justin Green wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Yeah, I went there and it offered no proof to counter the statements I
>>>>>>made above. Learn to get the facts- I tire of your rants that come
>
> only
>
>>>>>>from you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Please tell me how those entities entered into a partnership agreement
>>>
>>>if
>>>
>>>
>>>>>they were divisions of another company and no longer separate entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's a quote from the Agreement, AS FILED WITH THE SEC:
>>>>>
>>>>>WHEREAS, the undersigned constitute all of the current parties to that
>>>>>certain Cellco Partnership Amended and Restated Partnership Agreement
>>>
>>>dated
>>>
>>>
>>>>>as of April 3, 2000 by and among the members of the Bell Atlantic Group
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the members of the Vodafone Group (as further amended as of July 10,
>>>
>>>2000,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the "Partnership Agreement"), it being the case that prior to the date
>>>>>hereof (i) AirTouch Paging, then a member of the Vodafone Group, was
>>>
>>>merged
>>>
>>>
>>>>>with and into JV PartnerCo, LLC, another member of the Vodafone Group,
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>(ii) GTE Wireless of the South Incorporated, then a member of the Bell
>>>>>Atlantic Group, was merged with and into GTE Wireless Incorporated,
>>>
>>>another
>>>
>>>
>>>>>member of the Bell Atlantic Group; and...
>>>>>
>>>>>See? They are STILL separate legal entities.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Another article from Dow Jones, written today.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> http://money.cnn.com/services/ticker...9_FORTUNE5.htm
>
>>>>the 6th paragraph:
>>>>
>>>>" Verizon Wireless, which has 34.6 million customers, is a joint venture
>>>>of Verizon Communications (VZ) and Vodafone Group PLC (VOD)."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Just in case you thought the first article was a typo.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, you dolt, do you really think that the Dow Jones is going to list
>>>seperately the partners of Cellco? LOOK AT THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.
>>>
>>>God, it must be nice to be an 8 year old with internet access.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Give up, stupid- you are going to crap yourself when you read the other
>>posts I just sent. VZ Wireless even admits in their press releases they
>>are owned by Verizon. Your asttempt at circular logic just bit you in
>>the ass.
>
>
>
> I did crap after I read that. And the turd in the pot could debate better
> than you.
>
>
they say the next generation is always smarter- I guess the turd proved
that true.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin Green wrote:
> > "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Justin Green wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Justin Green wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I would suggest you do some research at
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You
obviously
> >>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I guess Cellco Partnership's lawyers and accountants need to brush
up,
> >>>
> >>>too,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>as they still think that Cellco is owned by severeal entities,
> >
> > including
> >
> >>>>>Bell Atlantic Cellular Holdings.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Or, you could actually explain the reason that there are several
> >>>
> >>>entities
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>listed on the amended partnership agreement that don't file SEC
> >
> > reports.
> >
> >>>>>And they ARE separate entities.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Divisions, in the strict sense of the word, like you use it, does not
> >>>
> >>>have
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>LLC, LP, or Inc., behind their names. When they do, rest assured it
is
> >>>
> >>>a
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>separate entity, which COULD BE owned by another entity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Are you really this stupid in real life?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>No- I tried 'dumbing down' to help you understand, but I obviously
have
> >>>>a few more steps down to take to accomplish this.
> >>>>
> >>>>My final quote from Verizon Wireless, taken directly from their
website.
> >>>>
> >>>> Parent Companies
> >>>>A Fortune 10 company, Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) is one of the
> >>>>world's leading providers of communications services. Verizon
companies
> >>>>are the largest providers of wireline and wireless communications in
the
> >>>>United States, with 136.6 million access line equivalents and 33.3
> >>>>million Verizon Wireless customers. Verizon is the third largest
> >>>>long-distance carrier for U.S. consumers, with 13.2 million
> >>>>long-distance lines, and the company is also the largest directory
> >>>>publisher in the world, as measured by directory titles and
circulation.
> >>>>With more than $67 billion in annual revenues and 227,000 employees,
> >>>>Verizon's global presence extends to the Americas, Europe, Asia and
the
> >>>>Pacific. For more information on Verizon, visit www.verizon.com.
> >>>>Vodafone is the world's largest mobile operator with over 112.5m
> >>>>proportionate customers worldwide and equity interests in 28 countries
> >>>>and Partner Networks in a further 7 countries.
> >>>>www.vodafone.com
> >>>>
> >>>>Your beef is not with me, it is with your beloved '(not) private
> >>>>company'. They are misinforming everybody about their relationship
with
> >>>>Verizon. If you reaaly want to get an explanation form the horse'
> >>>>mouth, check out page 5 of the Press Kit on Verizon Wireless' site:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
http://www.verizonwireless.com/pdfs/...skit7-1-03.pdf
> >
> >>>>Read the portions from February to June 30, 2000. It outlines quite
> >>>>clearly how the merger swallowed up all of the partnership entities.
> >>>>
> >>>>If you have any further concerns, you better contact VZ Wireless-
after
> >>>>all, I am only provideing what they have said. THey must be lying.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Again, answer the ****ing questions. You can't. Why? Because you
are
> >>>absolutely a crack smoking moron.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>OK- R e a l s l o w t h i s t i m e :
> >>
> >>1. Click the link to the press kit I provided (its the blue thingy).
> >>Lucky for you, this won't require typing with both hands- I'd hate to
> >>interrupt your 'private moment'.
> >>2. Read the press kit or any one of the many sources I have referenced
> >> by hyperlink, not because "I said so" (I would recommend having Mommy
> >>read it to you if the words are too big)
> >>3. Take up your concerns with the corporate liars- I only repeat their
> >>information.
> >>
> >>And do me one more favor- come to the table with some facts next time.
> >
> >
> > I did. You refuse to read the sources.
> >
> >
> >>Your questions are meaningless, and if you were correct, you'd be able
> >>to give twenty verifiable sources for every one I've provided (and I can
> >>provide more if need be).
> >
> >
> > My questions are meaningless to you, because you're too stupid to answer
> > them.
> >
> >
> >>Now go rest up- I hear your favorite episode of Teletubbies is on in the
> >>morning, but you'll have to miss your morning nap.
> >
> >
> > Try answering the questions.
> >
> >
> No- you seemed convinced that either the agreement or the statements by
> Verizon are false. Go to the SEC- you are a genius and just uncovered
> the biggest corporate scandal of the year. But when you talk to them-
> take the binkie out of your mouth. It makes you mumble and drool.

Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin Green wrote:
> > "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Justin Green wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Justin Green wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I would suggest you do some research at
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You
obviously
> >>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I guess Cellco Partnership's lawyers and accountants need to brush
up,
> >>>
> >>>too,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>as they still think that Cellco is owned by severeal entities,
> >
> > including
> >
> >>>>>Bell Atlantic Cellular Holdings.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Or, you could actually explain the reason that there are several
> >>>
> >>>entities
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>listed on the amended partnership agreement that don't file SEC
> >
> > reports.
> >
> >>>>>And they ARE separate entities.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Divisions, in the strict sense of the word, like you use it, does not
> >>>
> >>>have
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>LLC, LP, or Inc., behind their names. When they do, rest assured it
is
> >>>
> >>>a
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>separate entity, which COULD BE owned by another entity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Are you really this stupid in real life?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>No- I tried 'dumbing down' to help you understand, but I obviously
have
> >>>>a few more steps down to take to accomplish this.
> >>>>
> >>>>My final quote from Verizon Wireless, taken directly from their
website.
> >>>>
> >>>> Parent Companies
> >>>>A Fortune 10 company, Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) is one of the
> >>>>world's leading providers of communications services. Verizon
companies
> >>>>are the largest providers of wireline and wireless communications in
the
> >>>>United States, with 136.6 million access line equivalents and 33.3
> >>>>million Verizon Wireless customers. Verizon is the third largest
> >>>>long-distance carrier for U.S. consumers, with 13.2 million
> >>>>long-distance lines, and the company is also the largest directory
> >>>>publisher in the world, as measured by directory titles and
circulation.
> >>>>With more than $67 billion in annual revenues and 227,000 employees,
> >>>>Verizon's global presence extends to the Americas, Europe, Asia and
the
> >>>>Pacific. For more information on Verizon, visit www.verizon.com.
> >>>>Vodafone is the world's largest mobile operator with over 112.5m
> >>>>proportionate customers worldwide and equity interests in 28 countries
> >>>>and Partner Networks in a further 7 countries.
> >>>>www.vodafone.com
> >>>>
> >>>>Your beef is not with me, it is with your beloved '(not) private
> >>>>company'. They are misinforming everybody about their relationship
with
> >>>>Verizon. If you reaaly want to get an explanation form the horse'
> >>>>mouth, check out page 5 of the Press Kit on Verizon Wireless' site:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
http://www.verizonwireless.com/pdfs/...skit7-1-03.pdf
> >
> >>>>Read the portions from February to June 30, 2000. It outlines quite
> >>>>clearly how the merger swallowed up all of the partnership entities.
> >>>>
> >>>>If you have any further concerns, you better contact VZ Wireless-
after
> >>>>all, I am only provideing what they have said. THey must be lying.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Again, answer the ****ing questions. You can't. Why? Because you
are
> >>>absolutely a crack smoking moron.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>OK- R e a l s l o w t h i s t i m e :
> >>
> >>1. Click the link to the press kit I provided (its the blue thingy).
> >>Lucky for you, this won't require typing with both hands- I'd hate to
> >>interrupt your 'private moment'.
> >>2. Read the press kit or any one of the many sources I have referenced
> >> by hyperlink, not because "I said so" (I would recommend having Mommy
> >>read it to you if the words are too big)
> >>3. Take up your concerns with the corporate liars- I only repeat their
> >>information.
> >>
> >>And do me one more favor- come to the table with some facts next time.
> >
> >
> > I did. You refuse to read the sources.
> >
> >
> >>Your questions are meaningless, and if you were correct, you'd be able
> >>to give twenty verifiable sources for every one I've provided (and I can
> >>provide more if need be).
> >
> >
> > My questions are meaningless to you, because you're too stupid to answer
> > them.
> >
> >
> >>Now go rest up- I hear your favorite episode of Teletubbies is on in the
> >>morning, but you'll have to miss your morning nap.
> >
> >
> > Try answering the questions.
> >
> >
> No- you seemed convinced that either the agreement or the statements by
> Verizon are false. Go to the SEC- you are a genius and just uncovered
> the biggest corporate scandal of the year. But when you talk to them-
> take the binkie out of your mouth. It makes you mumble and drool.

Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.

Justin Green wrote:

>
> Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
> proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.
>
>
Then it is owned by Verizon. Thanks for seeing it.

Justin Green wrote:

>
> Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
> proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.
>
>
Then it is owned by Verizon. Thanks for seeing it.

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> Justin Green wrote:
>
>>
>> Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
>> proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.
>>
>>
> Then it is owned by Verizon. Thanks for seeing it.
>
And I do understand both quite well. Never been a problem with that.

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> Justin Green wrote:
>
>>
>> Neither are false. The fact that you cannot understand this is further
>> proof that you are a complete and utter dip****.
>>
>>
> Then it is owned by Verizon. Thanks for seeing it.
>
And I do understand both quite well. Never been a problem with that.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin Green wrote:
> > "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Justin Green wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:6%[email protected]...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>Justin Green wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>You're right- I'm in a conspiracy with Verizon and Verizon Wireless
to
> >>>>>>spread lies about Verizon. Verizon lies about it, Verizon Wireless
> >
> > lies
> >
> >>>>>>about it, and I lie about it. I just wonder how big the **** stain
is
> >>>>>>that you're sitting in.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I've told you why they don't file- that crack pipe in your right
hand
> >
> > is
> >
> >>>>>>playing havoc with your memory.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No you didn't. Your explanation was simply WRONG.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I know- I've been wrong about everything (so is Verizon, obviously)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Why yes, thanks for finally admitting you're wrong.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>And to really jog your memory, I
> >>>>>>originally was pointing out that VZ Wireless was not a 'private
> >>>>>>comapny', but was in fact owned (in part) by Verizon.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>It is owned in part by VZ. But it is private. Besides being a
dumbass
> >>>>>working at McDonalds, that's the reason you can't go to a broker and
> >
> > buy
> >
> >>>an
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>interest in Cellco. You agree that Cellco doesn't have shares
> >>>
> >>>outstanding,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>or shares at all for that matter, right?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>You have me confused with your smarter brother- he's the one in your
> >>>>family who qualifed for the McDonalds job. Put your keyboard away and
> >>>>go to bed- Mommy says you need your beauty sleep. You can't buy AOL
> >>>>stock anymore either- it is now AOL/Time Warner as a result of their
> >>>>merger. Is AOL a private Company? The AOL corporate entities still
do
> >>>>business. Your logic sucks- just admit defeat and give up.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>No one in my family is as dumb as you. Not even Spot, the family dog.
> >>>Nah, you're wrong. Please tell me why you can't buy stock in Cellco.
> >
> > Both
> >
> >>>reasons. There are two.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>I believe that
> >>>>>>has been done with information from both entities. You can ask for
> >
> > all
> >
> >>>>>>of the clarification you want. I would suggest you do some research
> >
> > at
> >
> >>>>>>the SEC website you are so fond of directing others to. You
obviously
> >>>>>>need to brush up on the state of affairs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Again, explain why the partnership agreement is "wrong" according to
> >>>
> >>>you.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I never said the partnership agreement was wrong- it is quite solid,
as
> >>>>a matter of fact. You are just trying to read things into it that not
> >>>>only are wrong, but don't make any sense. Parent corporations can
make
> >>>>a business deal using any of the business entities it has at its
> >>>>disposal. You really need to brush up on these things- this is
Business
> >>>>101 stuff.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>So I'm reading into the agreement that it is owned by several PRIVATE
> >>>companies?
> >>>
> >>>Oh my God you are stupid.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Who said they were companies?
> >
> >
> >
> > I did, and they are. Companies file with the SEC, not divisions that
are
> > part of a larger entity. You understand the difference between a
division
> > that is not a separate entity and one that is, right?
> >
> >
> What source do have to verify that they are companies and not part of
> the VerizonCorporate structure? I've provided my information (or
> other's information, to be more precise). Your turn to provide facts
> (however unlikely that is).


1) CellCO. What the hell do you think the CO stands for? BIG ****ING HINT:
It's a partnership, so it doesn't stand for Corporation.
2) http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/100/100576.html Cellco Partnership COMPANY
profile at Yahoo Finance.
3) Any business association is a company. Especially if it is a separate
legal entitiy with a ****ing PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.

The fact that you don't even understand the concept of what a company is
says it all. You're a dumb****.