View Single Post
Old 26 May 2017, 10:35   #63
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by kovacm View Post
What "trustworthy" evidence?

Atari Inc - Amiga Corp. copy of contract sign by Warner owned Atari Inc. vs R J Mical claims that it was Jack behind this deal and that Jack gave Amiga 500.000$ ???

Or what R J Mical said that Atari Inc offer Amiga 1$ per share, than 0.8$... when in contract is stated 3$ per share???

What more evidence do you want?

R J Mical is LIAR, like I stated before, and what he said for himself.
Problem is that people believe him and took his word for truth!
This is exactly what I mean! You are using one example to try to disprove all other statements. So here's my response:

You are right that the contract stated all those things and that it was signed prior to Tramiel taking over the company. This is easily found in several on-line sources.

However, I think it's really dubious to say RJ Mical knew all the details of the contract and negotiations: the man was not Amiga's CEO and was not directly involved in any of the negotiations at all.

It's entirely possible that his boss (David Morse) told him this happened a certain way and he just believed it. Considering how David was negotiating (see pages 745 and 746 from Atari Inc: Business is fun, where he's clearly bending the truth to get an advantage), this seems distinctly possible to me.

Couple this with misremembering the way things went after a good 30 years or so, and I'd say that this certainly feel a more plausible explanation than RJ deliberately telling a bunch of lies. Any day of the week. Then again, I met RJ once and he's a very nice guy so maybe I'm biased.

However, the same book also shows that Tramiel was not so much a nice guy: on page 743, it is stated he bluntly/honestly told Amiga inc that he wanted the technology but not the people. Effectively telling them, ahead of time, that doing business with him meant losing their jobs and their work. No wonder that Amiga Inc. got worried when he bought Atari.

I would've!


So in essence, the very source you use to try and prove Tramiel was a good guy also contains information that shows he was not really one. It seems to me that you just want Tramiel to be a good guy and aren't that interested in any evidence to the contrary. Which is fine, but you should call that what it is: your opinion. Not a fact.

Because as we've seen, there is plenty of counter evidence that says otherwise.
roondar is offline  
Page generated in 0.08562 seconds with 9 queries