Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 9637586" data-attributes="member: 59816">I guess it depends on what you think of as "following a 5-year plan". No plan is 100% set-in-stone. That would be foolish. But you were arguing that a plan that looked like "Book A. Book B. Book C." was too much of a plan. (Or at least it seemed so). I would assume that the plan would have a basic sketch on what those books actually look like - meaning I would think that the plan was more developed than that, not less (certainly more for 2026, if not 2027 as well.I'm not sure what you're saying here. I also don't know why you think I'm "devoting time to defending it". I'm devoting time to talking to you about it, because I find it interesting. I'm not really defending anything, beyond superficially. I simply think that if they say they have a five-year plan sketched out, then they probably do. I absolutely don't think that their next five years is set in stone, that would be ridiculous. Nor do I think that it particularly needs defending. I simply had just barely enough interest in why you formed your opinion to speak to you on the subject. Who suggested it was detailed or precise? "Book A; Book B" is not precise. As I say above, it's probably MORE detailed than that, but not set in stone. Not fleshed out.You won't catch me arguing that a corporation isn't using hype. Never said that it would.Huh? Where did I do that?As usual, on the interned, we seem to be arguing over a thin margin between opinions while looking like there is a gulf between us. I think that it should be easy to follow a "plan" simply because the plan is vague and broad enough to follow. You made it sound (to me) like you were arguing that there was no way that they left a five year plan. I believe that they probably did. Meanwhile, we agree that the plan is probably malleable and vague. To me, that's what a 5-year plan IS. It's still a plan.Sure, I agree.</blockquote>

Verification