You know, you'd be much more effective if you stayed with facts and left out
the personal attacks. If you had said that you had experience with these
antennas and that in your experience such-and-such was true, people would
pay more attention. It would make the same point without being perceived as
a personal attack. As soon as you start a personal attack, your credibility
suffers. This is not rocket science -- it's a basic concept of human
communication that anyone who works in any field of communication (writing,
lecturing, etc.) is taught.

You clearly have some experience in the field and some useful facts at your
fingertips. Use them without the vituperation and people will be more
interested in what you have to say. In your current mode you come across as
what is sometimes referred to as a "crank" and I suspect that isn't a good
reflection of who you really are.

JonS



"BHelman" wrote in message
om...
You pretty much will say anything to promote your product, that I have
learned, even if it means boastering inaccuracte facts. The lws of
phsyics do not change simply because you want to promote the Monroy
unit.

I have seen the inside of Commant and they are nothing close to a ball
design. The ball is simply there to dissipate static, and with an
epoxy blade they do not collect near the static, and are therefore
more linear type designs including ground-plane elements, as well as
free-element designs. This not only gives a better VSWR, but also
helps the H-plane radiation.

Again, I suggest you do your homework Thomas Monroy "Borchert".


Thomas Borchert wrote in message
...
Jon,

I noticed that SureCheck does say they got
better results with a blade antenna than the stick-and-ball type
(which is
what we were using).


Ever cut open one of the blades? I'm told they contain a stick and ball,
covered by a plastic blade.

I'm pretty sure your antenna was bad in some way.