Why are Barron's and Other Financial Media Out to Shut Down the Voice of the Individual Investor? http://www.earningsbase.com/research/wake_up5_barrons.jsp Example: http://www.whispernumber.com TODAYS EARNINGS REPORT TO WATCH MICROSOFT CORP. (MSFT) Earnings Report: 04/22/2004 After Market Close -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why These Two Estimates Are Meaningless - Interactive Chart - MSFT Earnings Profile - Earnings Calendar 0.29 Thomson/First Call Analysts Est. 0.29 Reuters/Multex Analysts Est. 0.32 WhisperNumber Investor's Estimate 0.34 Actual Earnings Per Share Commentary: The Microsoft whisper number was 32 cents. Actual reported was 34 cents. And the analysts were expecting 29 cents. Enough said. WhisperNumber's Wake Up, Edition V If You Look Real Hard You'll Be Able to Find One Absolute Truth Behind All the Lies and Deception Why are Barron's and Other Financial Media Out to Shut Down the Voice of the Individual Investor? Commentary provided WhisperNumber.com One thing we have yet to get used to is the amount of press coverage we receive and reading the humorous fiction that the financial press appears to go out of their way to write about us. For instance, we have read in quite respectable and trustworthy publications that a) we collect information from analysts (we don't), b) we've participated in numerous whisper number 'studies' (none cited by the press), and c) that our data, being based on individual investor expectation, could never be accurate or significant (it has been and continues to be). It's become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks mostly to lazy or just plain ignorant reporters who do all their research by typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so we wonder that if we don't correct the record, then all of the investors either coming back to the market or just entering the world of investing may just end up being filled with a bunch of stuff about us that just isn't true. This weekend the well read and respected Barron's revealed its true colors. Although within the past year alone Barron's has recommended our services and published our survey data, they chose to show their bias in favor of analysts and investments banks when they published a one-sided and misleading story against our company. Christopher Williams, a reporter for Barron's, attempted to look at the subject of whisper numbers and, although presented with facts to the contrary, wrote a story that is about as misleading as they get. He left out a few obvious truths that we had personally discussed with him on the phone when he called our office last week. (We also provided these truths in writing to him and his editor after our conversation.) But maybe we should have known something was amiss when he stated upfront to us that he had no 'agenda' in writing the article. (Why did he even bring the word 'agenda' up?) In any event he did write a story about the so-called 're-emergence' of whisper numbers. He then tried to dismantle the credibility of whispers by sourcing an (apparent) study by Mellon Capital's Managing Director Ramu Thiagargian. This study, according to Barron's and Mr. Thiagargian, sourced 'earnings' data from our site and two other web sites that publish whisper numbers. The study then matched those earnings expectations to analyst's estimates. (The reporter didn't mention where the analyst estimates came from but we'll assume from Reuters or First Call.) But the reporter left out what we consider a few major facts about this story - facts that were discussed and reviewed in writing with this reporter. FACT ONE: We informed Mr. Williams that one of the companies that the study utilized whisper number data from, getwhispers.com, has been out of business for two years. Let me repeat that - they've been out of business for two years (no web site or phone number, no known existence - go see the website for yourself.) Yet somehow they contributed data to this study. We actually brought Mr. Williams to the website during our interview and showed him the 'nothingness'. We just thought Barron's was better than this and did more fact checking, rather than relying on just anyone's word and presenting this type of misleading reporting. Apparently not. You'll have to call Barron's for their 'opinion'. Mr. Williams can be reached at 212-416-2000 (or via email at Christopher.firstname.lastname@example.org). You can ask for him, the editor of the story Robin Goldwyn Blumenthal, or editor and President Ed Finn.