----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Joseph,
We agree.
I can summarize your points in 3:
a) all technology eventually comes down in price, sooner or later.
b) there was no need to produce digital tuners in volume, reason by which economies of scale did not
have the chance to bring the price down.
c) the few $600 integrated sets are evidence that their tuner can not cost the $500 average charged
on larger sets, when they perform the same function.
I do not see the reason for your email to be presented as an argument of my email, it is exactly
what I am saying.
It is very obvious that manufacturers abused of the mandate to make a large profit because all of
their sets HAVE to have them with the blessing of Big Brother, and all of them found an opportunity
to make money for 2004 and 2005 large sets since there was no competition nor pressure for
"integration at low cost", so they all kept milking in harmony, what a deal, and they will bring the
prices down, in harmony, but no rush.
I met at Display Search a manufacturer of HDTV chips (ironically from Germany, not Asia), he was
able to supply the complete chip-set for $15 before the mandate, including the MPEG-2 decoder and
all the components, the TV manufacturer charged us consumers average $704 in 2004, and average $500
on the 2005 models.
The industry abused from this mandate and was not cost sensitive to consumers, the FCC must have
planned this better before making mandates, and agree it is a dead horse, and for that reason I do
not want to hear anymore unsubstantiated claims that integrated tuners were/are cheap to consumers.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of Joseph Azar
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 10:06 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Obviously Rodolfo, this touches a nerve with you. My observations of the CE
industry over the years, coupled with observation of new product roll out,
and substantial price decreases in a short amount of time due to new,
consolidated and dedicated chip sets, leads me to the conclusion that
developing and manufacturing a chipset for digital tuning at a much lower
price than has been is not a fantasy or dream. As I pointed out, the
satellite industry created vastly superior product at prices that now allow
the product to be "given" (subsidized by subs, of course, but with a quick
return) away. Remember the BUDs? That was not very long ago, and look at the
prices then. If it were not for technology improving, and getting cheaper
due to research and volume, we would not have the sat industry we have
today. Look at the HD sat boxes that have HD sat and OTA, and the prices on
them now, even without that much volume being produced. How about Faroudja
and its products now vs. only a couple of years ago? Look what chipsets did
for them, and for prices. Go back in time to PLL tuner circuits before and
after dedicated chipsets. How about the price drops in CD players? DVD
players? Look at today's computers, Wi-Fi modems, etc. etc., including new
video cards with HD tuners. Look, even, at cable HD boxes and rental costs.
All these things came down quickly in price, and improved dramatically just
as quickly.
Yes, my argument is based on speculation, observation, gut feeling. But it
is also based on real life experiences of product development and roll outs.
As there was no "need" to produce digital tuners, and they were a "high end"
product, mfgs. could milk that market for a while, much as they do with any
new product and technology intro. A great example is all the Sony Qualia we
keep discussing here, and the new sets based on that technology. From
discussion here it appears that the new sets are improved over the
$12,000(?) set we saw at CES, are much less (1/2?) in cost, and its only
been, what, maybe 5 months since they have been available for sale?
So no one mfg. felt the need to develop a tuner chipset for a low cost as
the numbers were not there, no govt. mandate was there, too many variables
in HD standards, very little programming, and so many other reasons.
These are my opinions and observations. This discussion is now becoming moot
as we see $600 HD TVs with installed HD OTA tuners. I suggest we no longer
discuss this anymore as it is a dead issue due to the obvious.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 8:44 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Robert,
Your three statements:
"You have forgotten more about HDTV than I will ever know," What did
actually mean with this?
"The manufacturers will not raise these prices. They want to sell these
sets." I suggest you read
and research more about the overall industry, not just one small direct-view
set at Target.
Manufacturers "did" increase their integrated set prices but did it in a way
that was not easy to
discern what was the cost of what new feature/technology, and now, thanks to
the mandate for no
monitors, it is not possible to establish the differences because of the
lack of monitor versions on
40+ sizes.
Regarding earlier emails (" I haven't read every email. Please bring me up
to date on the issue"),
they are all there if you care to save them, a search by "integrated" within
your saved Tips would
get you the information you are asking. I believe that is of better service
for me to invest the
time to help on subjects we did not cover already.
Robert and Joseph,
There are subjects that lend themselves to opinion and argument, there are
others that are not that
flexible but numeric interpretation could provide some room for discussion,
there are others that
numbers themselves establish such a clear position that do not give much
room for arguing that part
of the equation, this is one of those.
The data I provided about the subject is sourced from actual MSRP of dozens
of main stream companies
on ALL of their lines since the tuner mandate started its implementation for
36" and larger, this is
not Mr. Joe-blow estimate and his opinionated statements in the XXX journal.
Please read the 2004 CES report (pages 16-21) or the HDTVetc Magazine
article dedicated to that, the
CES 2004 has been free for long (if you care to read), it takes a lot of
effort to collect the data,
analyze the entire HDTV industry, and provide a summary based on numerical
facts and actual
products, if you find any other well sourced factual information that
provides a different view let
us discuss that factual information, until then I feel is on the best
interest of everyone for me
not repeat information I already provided to respond to statements that do
not match the reality of
the HDTV industry.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Joseph Azar
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 7:07 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Rodolfo,
Though I generally agree with you, I am of mixed opinion on this. I do feel
that the mfgs. could have produced an acceptable digital tuner at a
reasonable a few years prior if they really needed (notice I did not say
wanted) to. A chip to do just that could have been developed easily enough,
but the resistive force has been two fold: not enough demand (hence volume),
and no need. As a result, companies could charge outrageous prices because
digital tuners were "cutting edge/high tech/new technology/very
special/etc-fill in what you want here as a marketing justification to over
charge". One only needs to look at the lowly satellite box, a giveaway now,
that has so much digital technology that was only available for outrageous
sums a few years earlier. No, there was no govt. mandate for sat boxes, but
there was on the business side if the sat cos. were to be a viable,
competitive player vs. cable. It is truly amazing the technological jump in
equipment, and the precipitous drop in price, for sat in just a very short
time.
My feeling is that tuners could have, and still can be, included for much
less had there been a need. But the other side of the coin is there is still
not much need as most use something other than antenna to get TV. Should
there be a need for OTA in an emergency, most people would not be able to
use it as they do not have any sort of antenna laying around the house.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Wade Brown
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 6:16 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
9/5/2005 5:11pm ct
Rodolfo,
You have forgotten more about HDTV than I will ever know,
but I still disagree with you on the mandated-inclusion pricing for
factory equipped OTA digital tuners, when there is no alternative, a
market condition which, in my very humble opinion, invalidates the
comparison you site below.
The manufacturers will not raise these prices. They want to
sell these sets.
While I could be wrong, I don't think I am. I'd bet the farm on
it.
Regarding:...
>b) manufacturers abused the mandate of integrated tuners to charge
>hundreds for a component that
>cost much less, that makes foolish the purchase itself, not the exclusion.
I haven't read every email. Please bring me up to date on the
issue.
Happy Labor Day,
Robert
At 05:00 PM 9/5/2005, you wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Robert,
>
>Your comment: "The point is, and it is strategically foolish to
>exclude OTA digital tuners from home
>television sets over a few dollars. It is an extraordinarily bad
>public policy to permit that."
>
>In theory yes, but decisions made based on the theory without a
>market that can respond fast enough
>could be foolish themselves.
>
>In practice,
>
>a) the slow speed of economies of scale over 7 years for tuners does
>not make it "a few dollars"
>product for "the pocket of the consumer", and
>
>b) manufacturers abused the mandate of integrated tuners to charge
>hundreds for a component that
>cost much less, that makes foolish the purchase itself, not the exclusion.
>
>Over the years I have provided abundant information on my reports
>and articles about this subject.
>
>A recent case was the $1000+ tuners on Pioneer Elite plasmas
>(integrated and monitor versions), that
>was an extreme to that abuse. How convenient the mandate, for whom?
>
>Check also the record of all 40"-plus screens when introduced in
>parallel as 50% monitors 50%
>integrated versions, they were jacking up $704 average for
>integration, and about $500 average on
>the next models (2005 models), that is official MSRP not Joe-blow estimate.
>
>Now that phenomenon can not be detected because of the lack of
>monitors on the 40"-plus size, and
>some people are still pointing to only the good deal of a small size
>$600 integrated TVs in Target
>to highlight that they are not expensive, which is true, but how
>inconsistent its implementation.
>
>Mandating might be a good policy, but only if the product is offered
>at a matured cost considering
>that the buyer is forced to pay a lot for it, and one might already
>have one (on the satellite STB
>for example), THAT is foolish.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Robert Wade Brown
>Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 3:45 PM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>9/25/2005 2:35pm ct
>
> I don't really mean to sound testy, but I wish people would
>stop being so short sighted about he role for television in a
>national emergency.
>
> Sure, if you were on the Gulf Coast this past week,
>television wasn't worth much.
>
> BUT, it was absolutely riveting for the rest of the nation
>and clearly resulted in a quicker response from the Federals
>government than would have been the case without the calmor... so it
>has a role in national emergencies.
>
> On the more mechanical point of using TV to receive
>information in the area of a disaster, the good thing about TV over
>the air is that it does not depend upon DSL wires or cable wires. If
>the tuner is built in and you have electricity and rabbit ears, you
>can receive.
>
> The point is, and it strategically foolish to exclude OTA
>digital tuners from home television sets over a few dollars. It is
>an extraordinarily bad public policy to permit that.
>
>Robert
>
>At 02:43 PM 9/1/2005, you wrote:
> >----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> >Not long ago there was a discussion here regarding the
> >importance of TV in emergencies.
> >
> >My take has been that TV is not a major player when it
> >comes to communication in emergency situations.
> >
> >Read this:
> >
> >http://news.yahoo.com/s/washpost/20050901/tc_washpost/communication
> s_networks_fail_disaster_area_re
>sidents
> >
> >To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> >To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
> >that same day) send an email to:
> >[email protected]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]
Joseph,
We agree.
I can summarize your points in 3:
a) all technology eventually comes down in price, sooner or later.
b) there was no need to produce digital tuners in volume, reason by which economies of scale did not
have the chance to bring the price down.
c) the few $600 integrated sets are evidence that their tuner can not cost the $500 average charged
on larger sets, when they perform the same function.
I do not see the reason for your email to be presented as an argument of my email, it is exactly
what I am saying.
It is very obvious that manufacturers abused of the mandate to make a large profit because all of
their sets HAVE to have them with the blessing of Big Brother, and all of them found an opportunity
to make money for 2004 and 2005 large sets since there was no competition nor pressure for
"integration at low cost", so they all kept milking in harmony, what a deal, and they will bring the
prices down, in harmony, but no rush.
I met at Display Search a manufacturer of HDTV chips (ironically from Germany, not Asia), he was
able to supply the complete chip-set for $15 before the mandate, including the MPEG-2 decoder and
all the components, the TV manufacturer charged us consumers average $704 in 2004, and average $500
on the 2005 models.
The industry abused from this mandate and was not cost sensitive to consumers, the FCC must have
planned this better before making mandates, and agree it is a dead horse, and for that reason I do
not want to hear anymore unsubstantiated claims that integrated tuners were/are cheap to consumers.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of Joseph Azar
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 10:06 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Obviously Rodolfo, this touches a nerve with you. My observations of the CE
industry over the years, coupled with observation of new product roll out,
and substantial price decreases in a short amount of time due to new,
consolidated and dedicated chip sets, leads me to the conclusion that
developing and manufacturing a chipset for digital tuning at a much lower
price than has been is not a fantasy or dream. As I pointed out, the
satellite industry created vastly superior product at prices that now allow
the product to be "given" (subsidized by subs, of course, but with a quick
return) away. Remember the BUDs? That was not very long ago, and look at the
prices then. If it were not for technology improving, and getting cheaper
due to research and volume, we would not have the sat industry we have
today. Look at the HD sat boxes that have HD sat and OTA, and the prices on
them now, even without that much volume being produced. How about Faroudja
and its products now vs. only a couple of years ago? Look what chipsets did
for them, and for prices. Go back in time to PLL tuner circuits before and
after dedicated chipsets. How about the price drops in CD players? DVD
players? Look at today's computers, Wi-Fi modems, etc. etc., including new
video cards with HD tuners. Look, even, at cable HD boxes and rental costs.
All these things came down quickly in price, and improved dramatically just
as quickly.
Yes, my argument is based on speculation, observation, gut feeling. But it
is also based on real life experiences of product development and roll outs.
As there was no "need" to produce digital tuners, and they were a "high end"
product, mfgs. could milk that market for a while, much as they do with any
new product and technology intro. A great example is all the Sony Qualia we
keep discussing here, and the new sets based on that technology. From
discussion here it appears that the new sets are improved over the
$12,000(?) set we saw at CES, are much less (1/2?) in cost, and its only
been, what, maybe 5 months since they have been available for sale?
So no one mfg. felt the need to develop a tuner chipset for a low cost as
the numbers were not there, no govt. mandate was there, too many variables
in HD standards, very little programming, and so many other reasons.
These are my opinions and observations. This discussion is now becoming moot
as we see $600 HD TVs with installed HD OTA tuners. I suggest we no longer
discuss this anymore as it is a dead issue due to the obvious.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 8:44 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Robert,
Your three statements:
"You have forgotten more about HDTV than I will ever know," What did
actually mean with this?
"The manufacturers will not raise these prices. They want to sell these
sets." I suggest you read
and research more about the overall industry, not just one small direct-view
set at Target.
Manufacturers "did" increase their integrated set prices but did it in a way
that was not easy to
discern what was the cost of what new feature/technology, and now, thanks to
the mandate for no
monitors, it is not possible to establish the differences because of the
lack of monitor versions on
40+ sizes.
Regarding earlier emails (" I haven't read every email. Please bring me up
to date on the issue"),
they are all there if you care to save them, a search by "integrated" within
your saved Tips would
get you the information you are asking. I believe that is of better service
for me to invest the
time to help on subjects we did not cover already.
Robert and Joseph,
There are subjects that lend themselves to opinion and argument, there are
others that are not that
flexible but numeric interpretation could provide some room for discussion,
there are others that
numbers themselves establish such a clear position that do not give much
room for arguing that part
of the equation, this is one of those.
The data I provided about the subject is sourced from actual MSRP of dozens
of main stream companies
on ALL of their lines since the tuner mandate started its implementation for
36" and larger, this is
not Mr. Joe-blow estimate and his opinionated statements in the XXX journal.
Please read the 2004 CES report (pages 16-21) or the HDTVetc Magazine
article dedicated to that, the
CES 2004 has been free for long (if you care to read), it takes a lot of
effort to collect the data,
analyze the entire HDTV industry, and provide a summary based on numerical
facts and actual
products, if you find any other well sourced factual information that
provides a different view let
us discuss that factual information, until then I feel is on the best
interest of everyone for me
not repeat information I already provided to respond to statements that do
not match the reality of
the HDTV industry.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Joseph Azar
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 7:07 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Rodolfo,
Though I generally agree with you, I am of mixed opinion on this. I do feel
that the mfgs. could have produced an acceptable digital tuner at a
reasonable a few years prior if they really needed (notice I did not say
wanted) to. A chip to do just that could have been developed easily enough,
but the resistive force has been two fold: not enough demand (hence volume),
and no need. As a result, companies could charge outrageous prices because
digital tuners were "cutting edge/high tech/new technology/very
special/etc-fill in what you want here as a marketing justification to over
charge". One only needs to look at the lowly satellite box, a giveaway now,
that has so much digital technology that was only available for outrageous
sums a few years earlier. No, there was no govt. mandate for sat boxes, but
there was on the business side if the sat cos. were to be a viable,
competitive player vs. cable. It is truly amazing the technological jump in
equipment, and the precipitous drop in price, for sat in just a very short
time.
My feeling is that tuners could have, and still can be, included for much
less had there been a need. But the other side of the coin is there is still
not much need as most use something other than antenna to get TV. Should
there be a need for OTA in an emergency, most people would not be able to
use it as they do not have any sort of antenna laying around the house.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Wade Brown
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 6:16 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
9/5/2005 5:11pm ct
Rodolfo,
You have forgotten more about HDTV than I will ever know,
but I still disagree with you on the mandated-inclusion pricing for
factory equipped OTA digital tuners, when there is no alternative, a
market condition which, in my very humble opinion, invalidates the
comparison you site below.
The manufacturers will not raise these prices. They want to
sell these sets.
While I could be wrong, I don't think I am. I'd bet the farm on
it.
Regarding:...
>b) manufacturers abused the mandate of integrated tuners to charge
>hundreds for a component that
>cost much less, that makes foolish the purchase itself, not the exclusion.
I haven't read every email. Please bring me up to date on the
issue.
Happy Labor Day,
Robert
At 05:00 PM 9/5/2005, you wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Robert,
>
>Your comment: "The point is, and it is strategically foolish to
>exclude OTA digital tuners from home
>television sets over a few dollars. It is an extraordinarily bad
>public policy to permit that."
>
>In theory yes, but decisions made based on the theory without a
>market that can respond fast enough
>could be foolish themselves.
>
>In practice,
>
>a) the slow speed of economies of scale over 7 years for tuners does
>not make it "a few dollars"
>product for "the pocket of the consumer", and
>
>b) manufacturers abused the mandate of integrated tuners to charge
>hundreds for a component that
>cost much less, that makes foolish the purchase itself, not the exclusion.
>
>Over the years I have provided abundant information on my reports
>and articles about this subject.
>
>A recent case was the $1000+ tuners on Pioneer Elite plasmas
>(integrated and monitor versions), that
>was an extreme to that abuse. How convenient the mandate, for whom?
>
>Check also the record of all 40"-plus screens when introduced in
>parallel as 50% monitors 50%
>integrated versions, they were jacking up $704 average for
>integration, and about $500 average on
>the next models (2005 models), that is official MSRP not Joe-blow estimate.
>
>Now that phenomenon can not be detected because of the lack of
>monitors on the 40"-plus size, and
>some people are still pointing to only the good deal of a small size
>$600 integrated TVs in Target
>to highlight that they are not expensive, which is true, but how
>inconsistent its implementation.
>
>Mandating might be a good policy, but only if the product is offered
>at a matured cost considering
>that the buyer is forced to pay a lot for it, and one might already
>have one (on the satellite STB
>for example), THAT is foolish.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Robert Wade Brown
>Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 3:45 PM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>9/25/2005 2:35pm ct
>
> I don't really mean to sound testy, but I wish people would
>stop being so short sighted about he role for television in a
>national emergency.
>
> Sure, if you were on the Gulf Coast this past week,
>television wasn't worth much.
>
> BUT, it was absolutely riveting for the rest of the nation
>and clearly resulted in a quicker response from the Federals
>government than would have been the case without the calmor... so it
>has a role in national emergencies.
>
> On the more mechanical point of using TV to receive
>information in the area of a disaster, the good thing about TV over
>the air is that it does not depend upon DSL wires or cable wires. If
>the tuner is built in and you have electricity and rabbit ears, you
>can receive.
>
> The point is, and it strategically foolish to exclude OTA
>digital tuners from home television sets over a few dollars. It is
>an extraordinarily bad public policy to permit that.
>
>Robert
>
>At 02:43 PM 9/1/2005, you wrote:
> >----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> >Not long ago there was a discussion here regarding the
> >importance of TV in emergencies.
> >
> >My take has been that TV is not a major player when it
> >comes to communication in emergency situations.
> >
> >Read this:
> >
> >http://news.yahoo.com/s/washpost/20050901/tc_washpost/communication
> s_networks_fail_disaster_area_re
>sidents
> >
> >To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
> >
> >To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
> >that same day) send an email to:
> >[email protected]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]