My web site hits are way up since you guys have started your
"constructive criticism". I certainly do appreciate the additional
traffic. Please give me some more invaluable design tips... LOL

www.telstar-electronics.com

"Telstar Electronics" wrote in message
ups.com...
My web site hits are way up since you guys have started your
"constructive criticism". I certainly do appreciate the additional
traffic. Please give me some more invaluable design tips... LOL

www.telstar-electronics.com


Yes, eBay and the FCC are interested.

U-Know-Who wrote:
Yes, eBay and the FCC are interested.

Now why would those two parties be interested in someone selling a few
amplifiers for acousto-optic devices?

www.telstar-electronics.com

After examination, the AKC has determined Griffag's amp to be NONFUNCTIONAL
with potential FIRE, EXPLOSION and ELECTRIC SHOCK hazards to humans.

It is thereby APPROVED for sale to keyclowns.

wrote:
After examination, the AKC has determined Griffag's amp to be NONFUNCTIONAL
with potential FIRE, EXPLOSION and ELECTRIC SHOCK hazards to humans.

It is thereby APPROVED for sale to keyclowns.

Thanks you fo your endorsement...

www.telstar-electronics.com

On 19 Sep 2006 02:57:56 -0700, "Telstar Electronics"
wrote:

+++My web site hits are way up since you guys have started your
+++"constructive criticism". I certainly do appreciate the additional
+++traffic. Please give me some more invaluable design tips... LOL
+++
+++www.telstar-electronics.com
**************

Actually there is rather little to give any meaningful type of
criticism of your product from a picture. Criticism from just
aspecification sheet is rather meaningless to critique. Even reported
data can be suspicious as there is no legitimate means of
verification. If a design review were to really be conducted then at
minimum a schematic would be needed to fully do any meaningful
criticism. Then that schematic has been mentioned as "proprietary" so
that concludes any hope of seeing it until further time as it is made
public.

james

james wrote:
Actually there is rather little to give any meaningful type of
criticism of your product from a picture. Criticism from just
aspecification sheet is rather meaningless to critique. Even reported
data can be suspicious as there is no legitimate means of
verification. If a design review were to really be conducted then at
minimum a schematic would be needed to fully do any meaningful
criticism. Then that schematic has been mentioned as "proprietary" so
that concludes any hope of seeing it until further time as it is made
public.

Absolutely right.

www.telstar-electronics.com

"Telstar Electronics" wrote...
My web site hits are way up since you guys have started your
"constructive criticism". I certainly do appreciate the additional
traffic.


But how many are converting to sales?
Is it just people wanting to see what the fuss is about?


Regards,

Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

Peter wrote:
But how many are converting to sales?
Is it just people wanting to see what the fuss is about?

No fuss... some evidently have their feathers ruffled when a poster
inserts a signature link. This is not spam (as some would have you
believe)... and is optional for the reader. They just like to complain
about anything and everything, as usual.

www.telstar-electronics.com

"Telstar Electronics" wrote...
Peter wrote:
But how many are converting to sales?
Is it just people wanting to see what the fuss is about?

No fuss... some evidently have their feathers ruffled when a poster
inserts a signature link.

Who would do a thing like that?

Peter.
http://www.citizensband.radiouk.com/

LOL...