Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 121 to 124 of 124
  1. #121
    ed
    Guest

    Re: As is typical - Oxford is WRONG

    "Oxford" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > News <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente..._bid_for_700_m
    >> > hz_spectrum.html

    >>
    >>
    >> Wait, didn't Oxy-moron promise SJ would put the kibosh on the Goog boys?

    >
    > how would anyone know?


    google certainly would know who they're bidding with! (and they say they're
    bidding without partners)
    http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/..._20071130.html


    > SJ doesn't pre-announce anything, so the press
    > can only make up theories, we'll only know for sure when / if Apple or
    > Google bids on the spectrum.


    there's no need to make anything up, as GOOGLE says they're bidding w/out
    partners.

    > you need to keep in mind Google and Apple are partners,


    in some things maybe, but google says they're not bidding w/ any partners.

    <snip>




    See More: Apple To Own Wireless 700Mhz Network




  2. #122
    News
    Guest

    Re: As is typical - Oxford is WRONG

    Oxford wrote:
    > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>SJ doesn't pre-announce anything

    >>
    >>Oh. You mean, like the iPhone.
    >>
    >>The iPhone that he announced in, what--January? 2007, which wasn't
    >>available until JUNE 30 of the same year?
    >>
    >>Please tell us AGAIN how Steve Jobs doesn't "pre-announce" anything.
    >>
    >>Remember, your words are recorded for posterity.
    >>
    >>What will you say down the road when you want to backtrack on your claim?

    >
    >
    > the iphone wasn't pre-announced it was simply announced. big difference.



    Announced, then unavailable for six months.

    Available and unavailable. Big difference.



  3. #123
    CozmicDebris
    Guest

    Re: As is typical - Oxford is WRONG

    Oxford <[email protected]> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
    [email protected]:

    > News <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> > you need to keep in mind Google and Apple are partners, so it's not a
    >> > case of Apple against Google... it's a case of how Google will set
    >> > things up for Apple if Google decides to bid, and visa-versa.

    >>
    >> Please share your info on bidder collusion with the SEC, DOJ and FCC.

    >
    > neither Apple nor Google hold a majority of the cell market at this time
    > so the SEC, DOJ, FCC don't have any say in the matter.


    And you just showed that you know nothing about spectrum bidding- we'll add
    it to the long list of things you are clueless about. What you are
    suggesting is bidder collusion and is against the law. Market share has
    nothing to do with it, moron.


    >
    > you are talking if AT&T and Verizon did a tandem bid, not Apple & Google.
    >
    > please learn about business before you post again.
    >


    Yes you should.



  4. #124
    Elmo P. Shagnasty
    Guest

    Re: As is typical - Oxford is WRONG

    In article
    <[email protected]>,
    Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:

    > > Please tell us AGAIN how Steve Jobs doesn't "pre-announce" anything.
    > >
    > > Remember, your words are recorded for posterity.
    > >
    > > What will you say down the road when you want to backtrack on your claim?

    >
    > the iphone wasn't pre-announced it was simply announced. big difference.


    Pray tell, what is the difference?

    I mean, I agree with you. But the general unwashed masses take
    "pre-announced" to mean "announced prior to its availability".

    Steve Jobs announces products far, far before their availability so as
    to drum up excitement among those same unwashed masses.

    What do YOU mean by "it wasn't pre-announced, it was merely announced"?

    You will ignore this, because you are now out of options.




  • Similar Threads




  • Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789