To Whom It May Concern:

 

My comment in the June 2004 ASR was ostensibly on the article that preceded it in the journal (Note: A reply by the authors of the article appeared after my comment).  In fact, that article was a redacted version of the paper that was the basis for my comment (here is the original).  The changes to the paper did not invalidate the substance of my comment, but they did render some of my statements (in particular, those that claim that the paper did not refer to any alternative explanations for buybacks) inaccurate.  In the October 2004 issue, ASR published an erratum, stating: (a) that the paper should not have been modified after the completion of the comment; and (b) listing these modifications.