| John Navas 2008-01-22, 10:33 pm |
| On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:51:39 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 47969d0e$0$84165$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>IMHO IIRC wrote:
>
>
>Yeah, well don't hold your breath. Navas never has references or citations.
Too funny! Let's see if you have any...
>One person said that for Apple or AT&T to have denied the USA Today
>story would have amounted to dignifying what he believed to be sour
>grapes. That's highly unlikely. An executive of a large company like
>Verizon has to be extremely careful with public statements because of
>Sarbanes-Oxley; you can't be running around making up lies and having
>them published in the media, or a lawsuit will quickly result. I worked
>for a company with a loose-lipped VP who got the company into a lot of
>legal trouble with his outrageous public statements.
No citations. What a shock. Not.
>I wonder why the AT&T shills are so unhappy that AT&T was Apple's second
>choice. Geez, AT&T made a good decision, the iPhone is a success
>(following the $200 price cut anyway), and it helped AT&T add a lot of
>new retail subscribers, an area where they were badly lagging Verizon.
The shill here is you, constant Verizon apologist and AT&T basher.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
|