Talk about souring the relationship for future negotiations :)

...I totally agree with the problem Mark, I just don't think you grasp the issue causing it. I played in High School with two people over 6'11" (both ended up playing some in Div I) and even then back in the 80's, there were unusual behaviors by our coaches, coming in with new air jordans (he was early in his career and they were the red/black ones that today are still the coolest) that didn't quite go with our purple and gold colors. The players didn't see much of this, minus alumni 'gifts' to the 7'1" guy.

It's really sad how people will pimp out kids to further their own interests...but Mark, honestly what are you doing to prevent this? Do you have camps? Do you have scouts? Calling in the IRS might get a couple of people to change, but reality is still you are pushing to improve your team, maybe just by a little better effort. This would be almost the same to me as making the players do one year of college before going pro. This still puts money across the tables, either above or below. You cannot legislate the change, you can only change the motivation driving the want. There just is too much money in pro sports to go around. You have greedy little punks who went from being king of their worlds in high school to now having millions of dollars before they can legally buy a beer...and people wonder why 20% of pro athletes have run ins with the law.

The facts are still the same, less than 1% of HS players make the college ranks, and then 1% of those make the pro's, even less now that talent is international. Until you either change the supply/demand curve or the obscene amount of money that is out there to change hands, or greed and the quest of power/succes will always push people to find new and better ways to move their agenda over others.

Nice try Mark, but maybe, just maybe all the NBA should look real hard at the image they have create over the past 30 years...just putting suits on the players only makes the thug look nice

It's official, the proof is in...engadget bloggers are worthless and once again, missed the mark, believing any scrap of paper that gets sent to them....get a real job guys.

People, this doesn't mean everything you think it does...they just are not going to be pushing data, but you will see UMTS Rel 99 type speeds of @ 250-300 Kbps (Rel 99 data speeds is topped out @384 Kbps). They just don't have any HSDPA devices yet, so nothing more than what you get today with EDGE. You will get 3G data, just not HSDPA. Will it be what people want? Hell no. First HSDPA device will come out later in the year.

One note, they do disable the 3G icon, so there isn't a way to know you ever are in 3G coverage unless you enable the debug mode.

People, this doesn't mean everything you think it does...they just are not going to be pushing data, but you will see UMTS Rel 99 type speeds of @ 250-300 Kbps (Rel 99 data speeds is topped out @384 Kbps). They just don't have any HSDPA devices yet, so nothing more than what you get today with EDGE. You will get 3G data, just not HSDPA. Will it be what people want? Hell no. First HSDPA device will come out later in the year.

One note, they do disable the 3G icon, so there isn't a way to know you ever are in 3G coverage unless you enable the debug mode.

Quick question here....why would you need push to talk from a phone with unlimited minutes? You are putting Simplex operation over two full duplex devices with unlimited ratings on both only so Metro can free up circuit switch lines and put them on data channels. I thought the idea of getting an unlimited rate plan with an inferior customer service model was that you wouldn't have to rely on gimmick systems such as this, but hey, what do I know...

Nice job Metro, screw your customers by selling them a horrible experience so they don't use the unlimited minutes you already sold them.

Do these people think all their customers are lemmings and will fall for this????

Mark,

I just want to thank you for being honest and real on this. Not everyday you hear a person with wealth talking so openly about how they know they are taxed at a lower percentage, knowing they can afford to pay the tax bill of 1,000 people who are on welfare.

I would like to know your opinion on something that has been bothering me and no one seems to catch onto this. The issue is freezing rates on sub-prime loans. In the current market, the future rates are projected to drop from the Fed several times in order to restart the economy, given the history of the Fed over the past 30 years. Yet we hear people like Bush and H Clinton talking about Freezing the rates at their current level, to help these people from having their homes foreclosed on. If that was the true goal, I would applaud them. However, since the rates are going down, these ARM loans should also be dropping, and the sub prime loan amount would also be dropping.

So instead of talking about a freeze, which only would help the banks maintain the current high rate, making them Billions over the life of the loan, they should be talking about setting an upward limit, yet allowing these loans to decrease as the Federal Rate decreases. WE DO NOT NEED A FREEZE!!!! These plans are not intended to help the consumers, these plans are only intended to help the banks maximize their profits in order to overcome the recent losses at the expense of people getting what they truly should; reduced payments according to their signed contracts.

So do you agree with my little rant?

Thanks again for being open and honest.

why not