Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Lucent Technologies (LU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr.Fun who wrote (8121)	6/11/1999 11:49:00 AM
From: Mighty Mizzou	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21876

Be careful Mr. Fun, you're dealing with a really P.O.ed CSCO router head. This guy bites the heads off Barbie dolls. OG, you're a meanie! But if I was in your shoes Id be pissed too! LOL! GO LUSCEND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To: Mr.Fun who wrote (8121)	6/11/1999 11:59:00 AM
From: The Phoenix	Respond to of 21876

Mr Fun, In a previous post you specifically called your $10 billion a SWAG Yes, and that post wasn't directed at you and didn't deserve the response I recieved. I understand what SWAG means....do you? If so, then why are you attacking it? If indeed you had intended that to mean a hard number from an insider at Juniper who is in a position to know what price they would or would not sell, it might have been helpful to everyone for you to have said so. Juniper will not go for under $5B.... no question in my mind. Certainly, any takeover would involve a fairly substantial premium above that level. $10 billion, or 40 times sales, I believe that $10B is more like 200 times sales right now. The issue I don't believe is sales...it's expectations. Eventually, Juniper will likely sell out to someone - Did I say they wouldn't? I simply said they will not prior to the IPO and will not within the first year after. A large proportion of Juniper's employees left other companies for the opportunity to make more money, not simply to work at a smaller company - thus the shorter lock-in granted by Goldman. I think you should investigate this further. Money is always a factor..but I can tell you that the shorter lock out is due to other factors which I believe are tied to the M40. OG