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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (84039)	6/21/1999 1:44:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Michael - Re: "I wonder if the government should give some of those taxes back when a billionaire suffers so?? :-)" Good point ! AMD gets all those tax credits just for losing money almost every quarter. Re: "The spread of billionaires (due to the internet revolution) is a huge weapon the American economy possesses. And what is even more exciting is so many of them are sooooo young. " ANother great point. Re: "Imagine what they will do in the next 20 years with all those billions!" I imagine they will be paying taxes on all that money - when they exercise their options and/or sell the stock. Maybe that will make Stephen Karasick happy. Paul

To: greenspirit who wrote (84039)	6/21/1999 3:52:00 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

OT OT RE: "That guy is a TRUE American success story!" Hi Michael, Here's the true American success story: Amazon's co-founder was a portfolio manager with financial connections for raising capital - critical to a startup. Broadcast.com had a rather similar story. I think one of the founders, or an early employee, was a VC. Drugstore.com took some people from a VC firm. Several other startups are luring VCs and venture lawyers as co-founders to start companies. i.e. Have a venture capitalist on the founding team. Capital is King. Only 5% of all American businesses which gain VC funding have been started/managed by women (i.e. a female on the founding/management team) and this number is disproportionately lower than the % of recently-gone public firms which have been started/managed by women per an Entrepreneurs report. i.e. VC funding is underfunding women started/managed business - the successful ones which go public - and are funding a disproportionate number of male owned/managed firms - and evidence is now showing they are missing some interesting IPOs made by founding teams with woman/women member/s (who gain capital through other channels, like corporate sponsors/angels/SBA gov't loans/customer contracts, etc.) per this report. Is this intentional? No, of course not. The disadvantage could simply be happening in the network channel: there are not too many women VCs. A small percent of VCs are women (usually 1 or 2 per firm of 8 or 10 partners.) However, with eBay, Women.com, etc., maybe some old things will improve as they become VCs/Angels. RE: "Imagine what they will do in the next 20 years with all those billions!" I hope they start businesses and/or apply their funds towards medical research. Amy J