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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: paul who wrote (65692)	7/24/1999 10:29:00 PM
From: sand wedge	Respond to of 97611

Talking to CPQ's major partners is a smart first step. And Microsoft, whether you like it or not, is the grandaddy of partners.... I also liked the fact that he added some humor to the situation. Naming a new CEO is just one more step in the process of fixing the current situation. All the whining and complain on this thread comes from the simple fact that people were looking for a quick pop. Compaq didn't create this problem overnight and it needs more then a glitzy name for CEO to get where it needs to go. I say give the guy a chance.

To: paul who wrote (65692)	7/25/1999 6:57:00 PM
From: rudedog	Respond to of 97611

Paul - thats how they got into trouble in the first place. I respectfully disagree. The frontline partnership with Microsoft, set up in 1992, was instrumental in putting CPQ into the lead with NT servers - on 1996 they had nearly 50% of that market. They also enjoyed embarassingly low royalties on most MS software and had the best field engagement of any of MSFT's partners. I would assume that MC would have called Gates, Barrett, Ellison, Schmidt, and probably also courtesy calls to Samsung and IBM... and whatever you think of MSFT or Gates personally, clearly Gates is the first call, just because of their overriding importance to CPQ.