They don't look at Pentax as a company at all - but as a vulnerable opportunity to make money. There is no interest in growing/building a company - only an interest in capitalizing on the opportunity.
-- Bruce Friday, May 11, 2007, 1:30:45 PM, you wrote: PJA> They don't look at Pentax as a camera company, they look at what the PJA> parts are worth as parts. PJA> 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. >> >> PJA> -- PJA> Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the PJA> sekend lw uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt PJA> nslpn raq liot. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
