In alt.cellular.sprintpcs CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:
>
> Go to any of their investor pages and pull up any one of their quarterly
> reprts that are filed with the SEC. Each and every one will have a line
> item for equipment subsidies.
>

No no. You said they list equipment subsidies as a loss. I said they do not.
They are two distinctly different things. They are expenses, as I said, and
not losses. You don't consider buying food a loss do you? You trade money
for food. A loss is giving something and getting nothing in return.

> It doesn't get any more public than that. And you can argue the semantics
> of the terminology used all you want- that's not going to change the
> reality of the situation.

It is not meerly semantics that I am arguing. You used a well defined word
very much incorrectly and applied it to subsidies. Subsidies are very much
NOT a loss to a carrier.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

America is the country where you buy a lifetime
supply of aspirin for one dollar, and use it up in two weeks.