SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly?
MSFT 478.53-1.0%Dec 12 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: nommedeguerre who wrote (34718)11/23/1999 8:04:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd  Read Replies (2) of 74651
 
NT: If you didn't get that analogy let me put it this way.The point that is being made is that IBM, a then much larger company, was a direct software competitor of MSFT and certainly had their own built in alternative and was a direct competitor of MSFT in the O/S software market. MSFT was under no obligation to sell their software contractually or otherwise to a dead beat competitor who 1. Owed them 10's of millions of dollars and were therefore a bad credit risk and 2. Was a competitor. and 3. Was reluctant to entertain certain restrictions in their contract with MSFT. which would make MSFT feel more comfortable in selling their product to this computer Goliath. No manufacturer except for specific joint ventures sells their branded product to a competitor. It just does not make sense without protection to the original manufacturer. MSFT it is reasonable to assume charged IBM more to offset 1. the fact that IBM was a competitor in the software field and2. IBM was a bad credit risk based on past experience. JFD
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext