On 25 Mar 2005 at 15:31, John Forbes wrote: > This certainly makes sense, and is the only conceivable explanation for > why a company should decline to provide adequate stock to meet a > demonstrable demand. Unless, of course, you believe that Pentax are > simply stupid. Although that is not an uncommon view on this list, I have to > say I don't share it. Their timing, however, leaves something to be desired.
Their timing always leaves something to be desired, ie if they aren't stupid are they simply pitiful communicators? > But I do question whether they are about to replace the FAs with FA-Ds, or > D-FAs. I reckon that DAs are more likely. :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
