Jump to content

Talk:Invesco

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.190.86.13 (talk) at 18:34, 17 September 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fair use rationale for Image:Invesco.gif

Image:Invesco.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dot.com bubble?

The statement about the company having 'relatively weak earnings' after the dot.com bubble is irrevelant. All asset management firms suffered throughout that period. The statement would only be true if it was worded: earnings were weak realtive to consumer stable companies. While that would make it correct, it would highlight the lack of relevance. Finance-writer (talk) 23:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Relatively weak' compared to its own earnings (both prior to 2001/2002-ish and from 2005 onward), not to those of other companies. Additionally, I don't see why this relatively minor quibble led you to remove a lot of other useful material from the article. Gr1st (talk) 23:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible Article

Can people please use complete paragraphs? Also, this article is for a GENERAL AUDIENCE, what the hell is AUM? I don't speak "business".67.190.86.13 (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]