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: Frank Ellis Morris who wrote (30073)	9/24/1999 4:50:00 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

My own take on Ballmer's comments: I tend to agree with th assessment that it was a ploy to prevent competition from being in a strong position to do the acquiring.....20 or even 50 billion shaved from nearly half a billion does not matter much, whereas smaller companies which would like to use their stock as currency for acquisitions may not be able to do so since a sharp decline hurts them more than it will MSFT. This is especially true with many of the smaller startups(RHAT) which have yet to generate healthy cash flows. I honestly believe that Ballmer's comments were intended to stymie these companies and as such and it is this that makes the act nefarious IMO. Perhaps a ploy such as this could be forgiven if looked at in the vacuum of healthy competition. However, in this case, Ballmer screwed over his own stockholders and in my mind broke any trust I had in MSFT mgt. If anyone wants to formally complain: nasdr.com It is not Ballmer's position to determine where the stock market should be. Today's action only serves to possibly further the government's case against MSFT since who else wields such power as to bring the Nasdaq down by near record levels? He may be doing himself and MSFT shareholders a disservice if in fact the govt. can use examples like today to argue that MSFT has too much power. I was not a believer but am rapidly moving to the other camp! But in the end it comes down to one simple point: Ballmer breached his Fiduciary Responsibility to his shareholders. His job is to create shareholder value- if it goes to extremes, it's the market's job to unwind it, not his. BK