在各個媒體上似乎都錯過了亞視問題的癥結所在，又或許是為存忠厚而不去提及。
亞視的死結，不在節目本身，不在制度本身，而是股東爭拗，大家晦氣，推倒副牌便算，懶理員工死活。
這有點像已故李翰祥導演「大軍閥」其中一幕，當城下戰士拼個你死我活，城上的軍閥們卻在捉棋，咁啱光頭軍閥許冠文輸棋，就算城下戰士們勢如破竹，他也要下撤退令。
這類擺員工上檯的方法不會發生在現代港資或歐美資金公司身上，大家也知道爭拗雙方一面是台資，一面是中資。兩者對香港甚至普世的企業社會責任，肯瞭解或遵守多少，大家心中有數。
台方因為限於非本地身份而無法取得大多數股權，一直被挾而心心不忿；中方因有香港居民作為股東而得到控制權，卻不去搞好生意而以花招度日。如今營運虧蝕，大家要掏腰包，當然就你推我讓。
九十年代《華僑日報》執笠，是風光大葬。就算營運虧蝕，老總香帥向股東爭取遣散最佳條件。令員工人人有糧出及有遣散費，仁義可風之餘，也值得現今一代企業人借鏡。
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
