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: Harry Sharp who wrote (33918)	11/13/1999 10:15:00 PM
From: Brian Malloy	Respond to of 74651

That was one analysts view. There is also one other view on the next to last page of Barron's which IMHO is on target. The writer Thomas G. Dolan rightly skewers Judge PJ on several counts in the Editorial Commentary entitled Defining Monopoly Judge Jackson's facts don't really support the case against Microsoft. A few of the more salient points are provided below. If someone can paste the entire article to the thread it would be great. 1. His circular arguments: "His reasoning, however large, is completely circular. Microsoft is said to have profited from its Windows monopoly, while sacrificing profits to protect the monopoly. We will not join Judge Jackson in second-guessing Microsoft's competitive strategy; we say only that the judge's guess makes no sense" 2. His definition of the problem to the exclusion of all substitutes: "Of course: Judge Jackson's facts don't have to make sense. Like any other antitrust case, the Microsoft case is whatever the judge wants it to be."..."The ease with which prosecuters and judges can use the power of definition to determine the outcome of an antitrust case is one of the gravest defects of the whole antitrust delusion" 3. His ignorance of basic economics regards pricing and what amounts to the Theory of increasing returns. (Which as an aside, Bill Miller speaks to with great eloquence on in his piece on AMZN - why he is buying as a value fund manager.) 4. Potential unresolved childhood issues: "For the judge's Findings of Fact, issued a week ago in the Microsoft antitrust case, are full of the resentment of skill and success that other people gave up when they put away childish things like the game of Monopoly" He ends with the following: "The findings of fact in the Microsoft case explode the theory of antitrust. Let us hope that one day this case will inspire the Supreme Court to look back at a century of nonsense and say what it should have said long before: "Enough, already." Regards to the MSFT longs, Embrace & Extend

To: Harry Sharp who wrote (33918)	11/13/1999 11:42:00 PM
From: ed	Respond to of 74651

Well, you know someone always like to say " I think" " I do not think ...etc", but never provide the reason. If you believe what Barron think, then you are a fool !!!Microsoft's business is more than OS/Application software/ Internet/ but investment, Telecommunication / Entertainment ...etc , you name it. To me, Barron did not have any credit at all, it is a junk !!! Do you remember not long ago Barron will be short on earning, well , you know what happen ?

To: Harry Sharp who wrote (33918)	11/14/1999 9:38:00 AM
From: Frank Ellis Morris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

>>Are these guys real? -------------------------------- Microsoft May Be Worth $65 a Share if Broken Up, Barron's Says New York, Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Shares of Microsoft Corp., the world's largest software maker, might be worth only $65 each if the company were broken up because of antitrust concerns, Barron's reported<< Can you believe that we pay the salary of these jerks? Where do they get these goof balls from? Frank