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: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 9:45:00 AM
From: Diogeron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Break it up and back up the truck.

To: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 10:44:00 AM
From: techtonicbull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Behavioral restrictions are more important to punish MSFT than mere break-up. Breaking them up alone could strengthen the company like a Japanese Kareitsu (sp).

To: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 11:47:00 AM
From: johnd	Respond to of 74651

"They've done it before. In 1994, they staved off a court battle by agreeing to an antitrust consent decree. Microsoft boss Bill Gates immediately sneered that the decree would have zero impact. " Similar stock action occurred in 94/95. Didn't go anywhere. Then from 95 to now, it moved 8 fold (78 now) to 12 fold (120 peak) from about $10/share to where it is now. This is the big picture on MSFT.

To: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 11:51:00 AM
From: limtex	Respond to of 74651

JC - Hmmmm Jackson and Klein should be very tough....break up MSFT....put it in straight jackets..... MSFT shareholders....well they made money so screw them too ( so what if there are millions of them) Bill and Steve....punish them.... But wait... this is a civil case....so what happens if Bill, Steve and their colleagues were to say :- Enough of this....here Mr Jackson and Mr Klein...here are the keys. Now you runit and we are going to start a new company...bye. Well I would be an investor in the new company and I don't think many people would want to stay in the old one. So tough guys who really wants to upset Bill and Steve....go on I double dare you. Best regards, L

To: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 8:11:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 74651

JC: Not too surprisingly this story is datelined:San Jose Mercury News - Not a lot of love for MSFT around San Jose. JFD

To: John Carragher who wrote (43008)	4/23/2000 10:38:00 PM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

John - BREAK it up. YEA!!! DO IT!!! And while they're at it, let's nip the rest of those monopolies-in-training. Intel has 90% of the PC processor sales, and, come to think of it, they have 100% of the Intel-based server market!!! How did that happen? Fair play? I think not!! BREAK UP INTEL!! CSCO has a near stranglehold on much of the network infrastructure, and is going after the rest. Nothing less than a structural remedy will slow those guys down!! BREAK UP CSCO!!! And hey, the biggest infant monopoly of all - AOL? Those guys want it all - connections, content, and your on-line profile are just the beginning. Root out the cancer before it is too big to stop!! BREAK UP AOL!!! And why stop there? We could develop a fast-track legal mechanism. Lots of people are already suggesting that MSFT should be taken right to the supreme court, skipping the appeals process. Why not just streamline some more? We're in a monopoly crisis, we need to process these criminals at internet speed!!! My suggestion for that would be a single courtroom appearance. I mean 1 day. The prosecution would lay out the charges in an hour or two, and the criminals -er, I mean, defendants - would get a few hours to rebut the charges. They shouldn't need more than that - heck, everyone knows they're guilty as sin or they wouldn't be in court in the first place. Then the judge makes his decision on the spot, and imposes punishment. And that's the end - no appeals, no wasted time. Just smooth, efficient justice. Now that I think of it, the federales have another mechanism they have been using more and more, along with state and local officials - ASSET SEIZURE!!! Now THERE's a real nuclear weapon!! If the government could seize the assets of any company even *SUSPECTED* of antitrust violations, without a trial - the way they can today of anyone even suspected of drug offences - think of the effect!! Those pirates would think twice if all they had to do was LOOK like a monopoly to have their assets seized and used to pay for new highways or the next big defense program. MSFT would have become the federal department of software back in 1993!!! I bet that no company would even try for more than 30% of any market - why take the chance? Of course, the government can always re-define a market to be, say, the market for desktop machines carrying the "DELL" logo, in which case DELL has a 100% monopoly!!! Jump on them, seize their assets, let them come back at the government to get them back!!! That would put the shoe on the other foot!!