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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Kelly who wrote (29594)	3/28/2000 1:26:00 PM
From: QwikSand	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Plus don't forget Scott McNealy and the rest of the Silicon Valley execs with enough cojones to speak up and help the DOJ are all real bleeding-heart liberals---of the Ayn Rand variety, that is. The ones that kept quiet didn't do so because they're Republicans. They simply feared the consequences of uttering the truth out loud. --QS

To: David Kelly who wrote (29594)	3/29/2000 1:46:00 AM
From: nihil	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Sorry, David, I own plenty of SUNW. Just because MSFT has many bought and paid for enemies among the Republicans doesn't mean that it isn't the ideological favorite of the the right-wing Republicans. In anti-trust law, the Democrats and most moderate Republicans (like Nixon's crowd) have always favored breaking up monopoly, preventing horizontal, vertical and conglomerate mergers, preventing vertical price fixing, and being harsh on destructive anti-competitive behavior. In contrast, the right wing Republican crowd starting with Reagan's DOJ and Bork (as the lead theorist) and the "law and economics" crowd (Richard Posner a leader) have favored a strict hand's off policy. Typically, under the anti-anti-trust crowd no one can be convicted unless they engage in actual targeted destruction of competitors, horizontal price fixing, or monopolistic merger. Under this view, Microsoft is guilty of nothing, and there is not even a hand to be slapped. As long as there is one viable alternative (e.g. Linux) there is no monopoly. As long as no one was compelled to use Windows, there is no monopoly. I am not necessarily sympathetic to this view of antitrust, but to deny that it exists is a major mistake. Until it looks like Bush is certain, I will tend to short MSFT. If it turns into a runaway for Bush, I will buy 02 OTM Leaps on Microsoft.