I agree with Bob and I think Daniel are talking about something else. Maybe DGT were hesitant how to respond to Jed, nobody but DGT knows. They are still the only failing party with the information we have. If it is as you say Daniel then they should have said no from the beginning. Giving answers that are unclear and hoping someone else will foot the bill was to create the situation. I think they deserve to not be trusted from a business point of view. It sounds to me they could do with a better leadership. It is easy to obtain a poor rating business wise. I lifted for example an eye when I saw that Papandreous and other politicians were involved from the beginning. I already had previos experience that made them suspicious. That could be dead wrong and I am not saying my reasons has any value for third party. Just shows how easy you get a stamp of "Not Trustworthy"..
Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 "Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort." PJM On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Revert the question? > Why should DGT work with someone that might cheat them? They did not ask > for help. Jed was too intrusive for their taste. > > > 2014-04-08 18:49 GMT-03:00 David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com>: > > Axil, >> >> Sometimes you must trust the companies with which you do business. Why >> work with some group that you think might cheat you? >> >> >>> >> > > > -- > Daniel Rocha - RJ > danieldi...@gmail.com >
