In all the postings on the non-compete clause in the past months and years I don't recall ever seeing the wording given as it is in this article. Is that accurate? I think if I had been aware that the wording read like that-- really a back-of-the-cocktail-napkin-jotting-- I would never have given a second thought about which was the court would have come down on it. Water under the bridge now, I guess. Go EDIG and good luck to us longs.

Newport Tom