John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:h3f7l21m2q2rjee9u0q3bdt1v9c0gcekeg@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:51:06 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
> <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
> <KEL4h.2583$Yy1.1124@textfe.usenetserver.com>:
>
>>In alt.cellular.t-mobile SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> The results for 3Q2006 are in, with T-Mobile reporting today.
>>>
>>> See "http://nordicgroup.us/marketshare/3Q2006/" for the results in
>>> graphical form.
>>>
>>> There are graphs for the following:
>>>
>>> Market Share
>>> Market Share over Time
>>> Market Share Change over Time
>>> ARPU
>>> ARPU Over Time
>>> Churn
>>> Churn Over Time
>>
>>The text format you posted here is incomplete.
>>
>>It still concerns me that you use the five large carriers to total
>>100% for market share when that is simply not true. That is like
>>saying that the total of the democratic and republican candidates that
>>ran for office this year is 100% of all the candidates. There should
>>be an OTHER column, as far as market share goes.
>
> Of course, but then his objective isn't objective.
>


Really? You are incapable of being objective and yet you point out the
flaw in others.

Stones- glass houses... do you get the picture, or should I be much
simpler about it for your dinosaur brain to process?