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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RTev who wrote (26181)	7/15/1999 7:24:00 PM
From: Mr. Tomatohead	Respond to of 74651

Hey ...Drake, thanks ! very informative. Bits like this are part of what I love about SI.

To: RTev who wrote (26181)	7/15/1999 9:43:00 PM
From: t2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

RTev, On second thought, maybe the review of the Bristol economic witness's testimony is not a sign of the jury leaning towards Bristol's case. Suppose you have (for example) 6 out of 8 jurors saying that there is no violation of anti-trust laws. The other 2 disagree and want to the other 6 to consider a certain part of the witness's testimony. Once that is done, the other 6 six could be swayed or would argue against the 2 using other facts. Maybe there is no real consensus among them. How many jurors does Bristol need to agree with their position to win the case? BTW--I guess it is hard to read into this.

To: RTev who wrote (26181)	7/15/1999 10:14:00 PM
From: t2	Respond to of 74651

RTev, I looked into some of the testimony of professor Langois's testimony from the Microsoft website. Granted it is a summary in support of MSFT's case but this paragraph does seem to be significant. I have been trying to figure this out and keep flip-flopping. One that hold some options and a lot of stock, i need to be able to read a little into this or at least be able to guess at what is happening. I think at this point i believe it will be a pro-MSFT decision as the comments below are significant if in essence this was what was read out in court. I also believe that state is supposed to be one of the richer ones in the US (could be wrong). Could this be a factor? Maybe. Again, Bristol's own economist, Professor Langlois, told the jury he was aware of no ISV that had stopped writing to UNIX, and no seller of UNIX that had claimed it would be disadvantaged in its competition with Windows NT and that he could think of no Bristol customer that claimed it would be less likely to continue to make applications available on UNIX because of anything Microsoft did with respect to WISE. Source: microsoft.com