"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Frackelton Gleason, whilst posing as 'Eduardo', shipped out another
load
when he wrote:

"gallant17" wrote in message
...

Actually, radio stocks are down at least 50%, and some are down 90%.
This goes to show that with iPods, cell phones, etc the long-term
outlook for radio is grim.

Stock price often has little to do with a business and more to do with
market trends and hot and cold sectors.

I'm going to retire enjoyable due to buying "value stocks" which are
simply
companies throwing off lots of cash and paying dividends which are
undervalued by various metrics.

Didn't you say sometime back that you'd have to keep working due to the
fact
that radio firms didn't have much of a pension plan? Something along the
lines
of being 70 years old or so?

No, I did not. You, in typical fachion, reversed the data points:

In the 60's and 70's, few radio companies, because they were so small, had
any kind of benefits... health insurance was not common, and benefits even
less common.

Today, most larger radio companies have full benefits menus. To the extent
that if we want to work beyond regular retirement ages, it is only because
we enjoy the business and want to keep working.

"retire enjoyable" at 70 or so doesn't seem too enjoyable.

Many people do not want to be retired and doing nothing.

Or is this merely another shipment of your BS?

No, it is just an example of your poor reading comprehension. You must have
gone to a bad US public school.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Frackelton Gleason, whilst posing as 'Eduardo', shipped out another
load
when he wrote:

"gallant17" wrote in message
...

Actually, radio stocks are down at least 50%, and some are down 90%.
This goes to show that with iPods, cell phones, etc the long-term
outlook for radio is grim.

Stock price often has little to do with a business and more to do with
market trends and hot and cold sectors.

I'm going to retire enjoyable due to buying "value stocks" which are
simply
companies throwing off lots of cash and paying dividends which are
undervalued by various metrics.

Didn't you say sometime back that you'd have to keep working due to the
fact
that radio firms didn't have much of a pension plan? Something along the
lines
of being 70 years old or so?

No, I did not. You, in typical fachion, reversed the data points:

In the 60's and 70's, few radio companies, because they were so small, had
any kind of benefits... health insurance was not common, and benefits even
less common.

Today, most larger radio companies have full benefits menus. To the extent
that if we want to work beyond regular retirement ages, it is only because
we enjoy the business and want to keep working.

"retire enjoyable" at 70 or so doesn't seem too enjoyable.

Many people do not want to be retired and doing nothing.

Or is this merely another shipment of your BS?

No, it is just an example of your poor reading comprehension. You must have
gone to a bad US public school.

Ah, but unlike you, I graduated!

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


No, it is just an example of your poor reading comprehension. You must
have
gone to a bad US public school.

Ah, but unlike you, I graduated!


And unlike you, I studied on my own and made a rather significant career out
of it. You, on the other hand, do basically nothing. How boring.

David Frackelton Gleason, fresh in from a stint standing on a corner posing as
'Eduardo', wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


No, it is just an example of your poor reading comprehension. You must
have
gone to a bad US public school.

Ah, but unlike you, I graduated!


And unlike you, I studied on my own and made a rather significant career out
of it. You, on the other hand, do basically nothing. How boring.

Uh-huh.