The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Gene Gillam
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2000 4:09 pm

The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by Gene Gillam » Thu Nov 29, 2001 4:25 pm

Before we continue bashing the NEMGTR maybe this will allay some of the indignation about the CD that never was:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete and Fran Thelander" pthelander@earthlink.net> To: "Gene Gillam" anngene@bellsouth.net>; "Richard Knudson" rknudson@stny.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [mg-tabc] The Sacred Octagon > Gene > > Here's the answer stright from Dick Knudson.... > > "No, the cd was never produced. Sony quoted $10,000 when we advertised > it then upped the price to $60,000 when it came time to do it. > > Dick" > > I agree..too bad it never happened. Maybe with the spread of the > technology to the retail consumer level, it could become feasible again. > > Pete > Too bad that money had to play a part in this, isn't it? Gene

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

DickShaler@aol.com
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2000 8:09 am

Re: The Sacred Octagon - Possibly Beating The Wrong Horse

Post by DickShaler@aol.com » Thu Nov 29, 2001 5:01 pm

Sounds like a Defense Department contract to me. But it does avoid the issue doesn't it? Dick

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests