Hi Mark,

Treachery and decide are two of the most powerful weapons know to man. I will give you another anonlogy that could be used to illustrate what I believe to be some problems with the MFP program. The analogy is real and was only discovered recently. It involves shareholders of a Silicon Valley private equity-investment firm named Silver Lake Partners. You would be surprised to know the names of some of the Silican Valley Partners owners.

Silver Lake Partners own 38% of the stock in Gartner that provides analysis of IT trends and help conpany's develop technological plans. Gartner's clients pay on average $85,000 to 95,000 per year for Gartner's research and adivce.

The problem with Silver Lake Partners is that many of its owners are the object of Gartner's research and recommendations. If this doesn't provide a huge conflict of interest in fact, it certainly provides the appearance that there is a conflict of interest.

The chain of command in a corporation is:

a) The shareholders own the company and elect its board of directors.

b) The board of directors hire the CEO.

c) The CEO hires everyone else including employees who do research and advise.

I know from my accounting that it doesn't take much in the way of ownership in a company to guarantee the owner that he can elect x number of members to the board of directors. A 38% ownership in a company is huge in this regard. That is greater than a 1/3 ownership.

As the article points out, this is not a healthy relationship and underminds Gartner services.

You seem to have personalized the first analogy that I provide. Please don't take this analogy personally for it's not intended to critise or demean anyone. The first analogy, as is this one, was an example of how I feel the MVP functions.

Below is a link for more information:

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=15800394

Well, the MVP are probably beginning to gather. I don't want to be here when they begin to swarm. It's time to head for cover.

Regards,

LelandJ