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: J. P. who wrote (31098)	10/25/1999 7:37:00 PM
From: t2	Respond to of 74651

JP, Jackson is a @#%$$%^. That is what i think of his methods. Throughout the trial, he wanted to get Microsoft. Did not give them enough time to prepare and pushed the trial ahead. He might now be feeling a bit guilty right about now. That is why MSFT could get some break in the fact finding. It going to appeals unless MSFT realizes that they are stronger than even the government realizes and it is better to settle now.

To: J. P. who wrote (31098)	10/25/1999 8:07:00 PM
From: Catcher	Respond to of 74651

worst case behind the judge's "method" is he is gradually "guiding" toward a negative "verdict" for msft but he wants to touch off as little market tumult as possible. is it common in cases like these to say that the decision will be announced "on a friday"? if so i am just unaware. twasn't a mis-statement because a day or two afterwords he clarified that it wouldn't be "this friday". maybe he has a really scary verdict and he's waiting till a "friday the 13th"---but that's not till October 2000. whatever the "findings" there is no neg consequence for the "wronged parties"--aol/ncsp/sunw/rhat(?)---so it's not them he's trying to protect. this is the biggest joke of the trial--the very companies who said they were threatened by softee have taken bold steps forward to accomplish the very "landscape" they said msft prevented---what gall.

To: J. P. who wrote (31098)	10/25/1999 10:17:00 PM
From: jmac	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

You're right about this. The announcement that the announcement would come on a friday some time in the future was timed to coincide with the MSFT release fo no other purpose than to place a cloud over MSFT's head. It's clear what this judge is going to do. It is equally clear that it will be overturned by an appellate judge years down the line. The trial is a joke, the government's case is a joke, the judge has become a joke.

To: J. P. who wrote (31098)	10/26/1999 5:04:00 AM
From: RTev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

I'm baffled as to the reasoning behind this, beyond it being a way that the government can toy with Microsoft and it's sharholders. Oh come now. I've become accustomed to irrational and paranoid comments about the case on this thread, but consider the alternative. Would you rather face uncertainty about the decision every day of the week for several weeks? If Jackson hadn't made that vague announcement, we'd be dealing with an endless stream of rumors about the decision from various websites. One or another would be telling us every day that they have it "on good authority" that the decision would be issued today or tomorrow. The announcement makes it clear that the decision will not come in the middle of the week. It decreases the level of uncertainty. I would have thought folks would consider that to be a good thing. And why make the announcement on earnings day? Pick another day when it would have had less impact. He picked a day when the news would be nearly buried in the flurry of reports on Microsoft's earnings. And why pick a Friday? Because that's the one day when there is time for the market to digest the significance of the news -- whatever it might be. It gives Microsoft's magnificent spin-meisters ample time to react and comment.

To: J. P. who wrote (31098)	10/26/1999 5:21:00 AM
From: Frank Ellis Morris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

>>Why did the judge announce he would be making a decision 2 minutes after MSFT reported earnings? Especially since he didn't even have his decision ready. Couldn't he have waited, say, until a couple days before he had his decision ready? I'm baffled as to the reasoning behind this, beyond it being a way that the government can toy with Microsoft and it's sharholders. It's kind of hilarious, a 75 dollar an hour judge playing with billions of dollars in market cap because it amuses him and feeds his ego. He gets to vicariously feel the power of Bill Gates, whom he seemingly so despises. <eom><< JP, I could not have stated it better. The entire case against Microsoft has always been on prejudice and the government putting its nose where it does not belong. There is a lot of political house cleaning that need to be done at the next election. A change of party may be what the Doctor orders. Frank