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.

Non-Tech : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mad2 who wrote (2534)	7/6/1999 5:01:00 AM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Respond to of 19428

Mad2, Good point. Several years back, I had a conversation with the CFO of a large silicon valley company. He stated at the time that the single thing that could make him more efficient would be the elimination of shareholder litigation. Of course, he was referring to cases where shareholders filed class-action suits against the company (not the opposite) but the larger point is relevant in both cases for a simple reason: Discovery in a shareholder lawsuit is a tremendous burden on the company involved. At one company I worked for there was an entire group of people in the legal/finance areas who were dedicated to doing nothing but coming up with the reams of information requested by litigants. They have to comply with the subpenas, and the fact that it may cost them millions to do so is just too bad. Compare that to what AG and the others will have to provide ZSUN. Personal financial records for the past few years (probably readily available) and maybe any records they have of electronic correspondance (ditto). ZSUN will have to subpena SI, Yahoo and the others for copies of the online postings, and may have to go to phone companies, ISPs and others to get additional "evidence" of collaboration. AG and the others will not be expected to have kept years of phone records. Bottom line though, is that AG and the others can probably hand over every record they have with a few hours at a copy machine. Discovery against a corporation can take months or years, and tie up every manager for days at a time. It's a losing game for the company, whether suing or being sued. Personally, I would immediately sell -- and seriously consider short-selling -- any company which felt it was desirable to engage in such litigation. Good companies propel their stock price by achieving results, by selling stuff, by generating real earnings. That shuts up the critics quite effectively. To me, companies which focus on anything other than achieving real results in their markets are suspect. Any CEO or CFO who willingly starts a process which will force him or her to focus on things outside the core business deserves to be fired. mg

To: Mad2 who wrote (2534)	7/6/1999 5:16:00 AM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19428

Mad2, another thought, slightly off-topic: Have you noticed that if you listened to the quarterly commentaries from INTC, MSFT and CSCO, you probably NEVER would buy those stocks? Always the same thing: Growth is going to slow. Prices are coming down. Can't expect this pace to keep up forever. New competitive technologies are coming along and could steal the show. You name it, and they'll use it as an excuse to talk things down. When's the last time you saw one of the profitless, poorly managed POS companies who are suing folks on SI make a similar proclaimation? Probably never. And the point: Good companies don't hype themselves. They talk themselves down. They point out all the negatives. They call attention to all the same things that shortsellers often point to. Then they go back to the office, stop talking, and produce results. I love companies that are more critical of themselves than I am. Bad companies can't produce results, so they focus on other stuff. Blaming shortsellers. Suing people. Issuing press releases to counter postings on message boards. They can't produce and have nothing better to do. Can you imagine Microsoft suing everybody who ever called BillG a "crook", or alleged that Microsoft was an illegal (criminal) monopoly? Off my soapbox. Market opens in four hours. Time for sleep... mg