Re: Apple To Own Wireless 700Mhz Network

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-A8B123.10291118112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...

> why so bitter david? if you don't like facts, don't read my posts. it's
> that simple.
>

One BIG problem bucko.....

You post ZERO facts. Your posts are filled with conjecture, outright lies
and fanatical fanboy fantasy.

And cross posted where they don't belong - just one big TROLL after another.

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-734FEC.10312218112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
>
> i deeply understand all that i post, but for some reason, you don't so
> you get mad instead of rising up to my level.
>

If you "deeply understand" the **** you post, you are in REAL trouble.
Delusional is the word mental professionals use to describe this.

Or, if voices in your head make you post your fiction, then schizophrenia
is the likely culprit.

Bottom line - if you "deeply understand" fanatical fantasy - seek help -
NOW!

"Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

> Get a clue - NO ONE "loves" what you write - do you see anyone supporting
> you?
> (Other than your quite obvious and obnoxious sock puppets)
>
> "lazy" isn't the word - fanatic fanboy fantasy is more like it.

you're just another groupie. that wants what i have...

give it up, you've been officially...

PLONKED!

sorry! you should have added value to USENET, like i do.

In article
<linuxlovesosx-66ACCA.10545018112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote:

> Jon <Jon@Cebridge.net> wrote:
>
> > > Google simply doesn't have any experience in hardware, nor any sales
> > > experience to go it alone, and while an mutual Apple/Google bid is
> > > possible. Apple can easily outbid Google if needed.
> > No, Apple cannot outbid google.
>
> Apple is wealthier than Google, I don't think you realize that.

Defined how? It may have a little more cash in hand--I didn't find a
current figure for Google, but Apple was reported with more cash
recently than Google was last spring. But the total value of Google,
what it would cost to buy all its stock at its current price, is higher
than the total value of Apple.

--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now

Oxford wrote:


> So Ness, learn about the world, don't spout stuff you don't understand.


Hey, big talker/broker, have you shorted the wireless firms (and GOOG) yet?

In article
<linuxlovesosx-0D2F92.10453018112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote:

> "Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
> > > Apple can easily outbid Google if needed.
> > >
> >
> > Again - you demonstrate your lack of ANY actual knowledge.
> >
> > Have you actually SEEN Google's market cap?
>
> Ness, so clueless in so many ways. You can't write a check against
> "market cap", you can only do it with liquid assets such as cash.

I gather you don't believe in the existence of capital markets.

> Apple is wealthier than Google by quite a wide margin.

In terms of cash, about 40% wealthier, comparing Google in March to
Apple currently. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by a wide margin.

....

> Banks don't look kindly on such ".com" bubbles, so Google is in a much
> weaker position than Apple to bid on the upcoming spectrum sale.

The price of Google's stock provides evidence of their ability to raise
capital--they could, after all, issue some more of it.

--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now

Oxford wrote:

> i deeply understand all that i post, but for some reason, you don't so
> you get mad instead of rising up to my level.
>

"... instead of rising up"?

That which is flushed flows downhill.

And if not, flush twice for effect.

In article <ULOdnfuG198uo93anZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> I can't speak for him but your whole purpose for posting is obviously to
> troll and annoy people who know more than you.

I think that's pretty clearly wrong, reading his posts. He really
believes he is an expert on this stuff, whether or not he has any reason
to.

--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-0D2F92.10453018112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...

> Ness, so clueless in so many ways. You can't write a check against
> "market cap", you can only do it with liquid assets such as cash.
>
> Apple is wealthier than Google by quite a wide margin. From a financial
> perspective Apple has more tangible assets, a fully built out
> distribution system, worldwide brand identity, etc. Google has little of
> that.
>
> So Ness, learn about the world, don't spout stuff you don't understand.
>

Holy **** - you really ARE that stupid aren't you??
So blinded you just can't see actual reality.

I don't have the time or inclination to teach you finance. While certainly
Apple's cash position is good, your blanket statements are VERY flawed.

You see (or think you see) only one side of the coin. Actually take a look
at Google's 10-Q(k) before you spout your complete bull****.

Once you actually look at the SEC filings...... I hope your crow tastes
good.

News <News@Groups.com> wrote:

> Hey, big talker/broker, have you shorted the wireless firms (and GOOG) yet?

no, but should have, Google has been dropping like a rock as of late.

http://snipurl.com/1ttur

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-F6E845.11351518112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> "Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> Get a clue - NO ONE "loves" what you write - do you see anyone supporting
>> you?
>> (Other than your quite obvious and obnoxious sock puppets)
>>
>> "lazy" isn't the word - fanatic fanboy fantasy is more like it.
>
> you're just another groupie. that wants what i have...
>
> give it up, you've been officially...
>
> PLONKED!
>
> sorry! you should have added value to USENET, like i do.


OOOOOOOOOOH!!!!! The great poobah Oxford has spoken!!
All bow down to the great Oxford.

It is very typical for little snot nose troll boys to run like this.
You get your ass kicked and then run like hell.

Oh - I seriously do NOT want the mental illness YOU have.

Ness Net wrote:

>
> "Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
> news:linuxlovesosx-F6E845.11351518112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
>
>> "Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Get a clue - NO ONE "loves" what you write - do you see anyone
>>> supporting
>>> you?
>>> (Other than your quite obvious and obnoxious sock puppets)
>>>
>>> "lazy" isn't the word - fanatic fanboy fantasy is more like it.
>>
>>
>> you're just another groupie. that wants what i have...
>>
>> give it up, you've been officially...
>>
>> PLONKED!
>>
>> sorry! you should have added value to USENET, like i do.
>
>
>
> OOOOOOOOOOH!!!!! The great poobah Oxford has spoken!!
> All bow down to the great Oxford.
>
> It is very typical for little snot nose troll boys to run like this.
> You get your ass kicked and then run like hell.
>
> Oh - I seriously do NOT want the mental illness YOU have.
>


Please remember to crosspost replies to the Oxturd to comp.sys.mac.advocacy,
since that is where his primary audience lies (literally and otherwise).

Oxford wrote:

> News <News@Groups.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Hey, big talker/broker, have you shorted the wireless firms (and GOOG) yet?
>
>
> no, but should have, Google has been dropping like a rock as of late.
>

Likewise, the AAPL "dot com" has not fallen far from the tree.

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-4D2CA6.11255118112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> "Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> > why are you so obsessed with me?
>>
>> Why are YOU so "obsessed" with trolling groups with fanboy crap?
>
> i haven't trolled a post in my life. fanboy? that's not my style.
>
>> Why are YOU post complete crap where it doesn't belong.
>
> i'm just posting info about the iphone to groups/people that are, "or
> will be" interested in the biggest cell revolution of our time.
>
> nothing wrong with that.
>
>> Why do YOU try so hard to be a complete ass?
>
> how do you mean? i'm just educating... so it sounds like you have issues
> against people being fully informed... how sad.
>
>> Answer those - and you will have answered your question.
>
> okay, they have been answered.
>
> do you have any other questions i can help you with?
>
> -

Wrong #1 - EVERY post I have seen is a troll - strike ONE

Wrong #2 - cross posting your **** where it doesn't belong is STRIKE 2
You have been told - numerous times by many it isn't wanted.
Yet you persist posting your complete horse****.

Wrong #3 - "Educating" - when you post fiction, conjecture, outright lies
and
fanatical fanboy fantasy - that is NOT education - it is TROLLING (see #1
above)
And, it is certainly being an asshole

THREE strikes - you fail miserably - sorry

David Friedman <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:

> > Apple is wealthier than Google, I don't think you realize that.
>
> Defined how? It may have a little more cash in hand--I didn't find a
> current figure for Google, but Apple was reported with more cash
> recently than Google was last spring.

yes, Apple has about 4.6 billion in cash more than Google, but what
google doesn't have is any tangible assets. Apple has many billions in
property, equipment, patents, etc. Google has basically nothing but rack
of servers.

> But the total value of Google,
> what it would cost to buy all its stock at its current price, is higher
> than the total value of Apple.

yes, but that is unrealistic, banks don't look at "cashed out value" of
stock since they know the stockin this case would collapse if that was
ever attempted. they look at assets. and Google has basically nothing
but a few spare bills.

-