As an accountant, I can't help wondering whether there hasn't been a little bit of creativity with the figures going on here.
Sparxx think that cameras are bad and endoscopes good. So, Pentax produce a set of figures that show that cameras are good and endoscopes bad. Where does that leave Sparxx? Looking silly, and, we hope, looking for an exit. John On Fri, 11 May 2007 21:30:45 +0100, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They don't look at Pentax as a camera company, they look at what the > parts are worth as parts. > > William Robb wrote: >> On 5/11/07, Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> --- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> ''I find no reason to be under the wing of >>> >>>> a huge capital.'' >>>> >>> Read: We won't lie down and be swallowed up and busted >>> apart by another company who doesn't share our values. >>> >>> Good for Pentax, I applaud them. >>> >>> -Brendan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> One of the things I've not been able to figure out from this whole >> thing is why a company like Sparx would buy into a camera company and >> then bitch when the company resists their efforts to get them out of >> their core business. >> I figure it's the investors who are clueless, not Pentax in this one. >> >> > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
