no takeover of pdn, page-20

Personally I have no problem with anyone exposing the downside of a given company, indeed it is essential for rational balance. Though it must be said, with some thread discussions, ie: MAK, where the downside is significant, many posters will not even take a glance at it. Preferring instead to only look on the bright side, as if analysts working behind the scenes are as dull as dishwater and will not embrace tomorrows great promises in any manner at all.

However, just as one might read some very sensible upside posts on a given company, the same sensibilities should be taken on board for the downside issues. Unfortunately in the instance we speak of here with PDN, there's no depth to the negative posts, which is a bit disappointing. It is shallow at best, if not tiresome - quite apart from taking up space

Without question, it is my view that all good companies should be able to handle slings and arrows from all directions and come away from the experience unscathed, as is the case with Paladin, and recently evidenced by the worlds third largest corporation becoming a major shareholder. Their due diligence, etc: opposed to mindless rantings about the downside of being part owner of the company.

I do find the might of the General Electric Corporation attractive in these matters, and would be keen to hear a few specifics on why they have blundered with Paladin.

None of this ranting though: .spit out the exact detail for one and all to read.