Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!mcgu5464
From: mcgu5464@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Ronald J Mcguire)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Hot RUMOR in Apple Land
Message-ID: <10297@uwm.edu>
Date: 18 Mar 91 01:07:09 GMT
References: <8044@crash.cts.com> <386@alchemy.UUCP>
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Lines: 23

In article <386@alchemy.UUCP> hzink@alchemy.UUCP (Harry K. Zink) writes:
>In article <8044@crash.cts.com> aford@pro-mansion.cts.com (Adam Ford) writes:
>
>>SEARS?  Yuck, I hate SEARS!  If Apple send thier computer to Sears, I'd
>>never buy an other Apple, unless they sold them at a different place.
>
>As I recall, one of the main topics of user disatisfaction with apple was that 
>the apple II is not marketed in a more popular way.  Now that the 

I have always been one to get a little tempermental, but you guys are off
the wall! I think what you are trying to say to each other is:
Yes, SEARS may sell the IIs, but they will not develop them any further
including system software support. Instead the rights should be sold to
a company like AE or for God's sake even Zip, who could at least keep
improving the system in its own little way for another 5 years or so.
Then they could be marketed by Pennys (since you don't like SEARS) or
another suitable retailer to the public who would be more than willing
to snap them up at the price which will be comparatively cheap. Other
than Apple asking too much to sell off the line (which I see might be
a factor "Well we *tried* to get someone to produce it, but noone wanted
to buy it!") there should be no problem finding a buyer. I wouldn't
mind, as long as the new parent would *support* it (something SEARS
would not or any other retailer for that matter).