Should the predictions stop?
We prognosticators have been having a tough time of it lately. We said Hillary Clinton would lose in New Hampshire (conveniently forgetting that we originally said she would win), we said John McCain's campaign was toast and that Mitt Romney's was getting there (that was before Michigan). We said Barack Obama was the closest thing to a sure thing after Iowa. All of these predictions were wrong.
We said a recession might be coming, but we also said it might not be coming. We said to buy this stock, but not buy that one. We said the worst part is partly over, whatever that means.
We said Phillies and Red Sox in the World Series (half right, but way half wrong). We're embarrassed to say we called Cowboys vs. Jaguars in the Superbowl, just to be different. Boy, were we wrong. We said the Mitchell report wouldn't have any new surprises about who might have used steroids in baseball. Didn't see that Clemens-thing coming at all (even though he has the second biggest head, figuratively and literally, in baseball after Barry).
Closer to telecom, we said Tellabs would be acquired. We said Nokia Siemens Networks would split up, and certainly wouldn't be in an acquiring mode. We said Qwest would make a comeback, but that Alcatel-Lucent might have too much to overcome. So far, we're wrong. Will any of our 2008 predictions come true? We still have time to be right. And wrong.
In election circles, it seems like a lot of people want the prognosticators to just shut up for a while. Should we all do that? Stop predicting? Stop making guesses, both educated and uneducated? Maybe they have forgotten that predictions are just predictions.
Editor's note: Just a quick editor's note to say Monday, Jan. 21 will be a publishing holiday for FierceTelecom in honor of Martin Luther King Day. We will resume our regular publishing schedule on Tuesday, Jan. 22. - Dan