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.

Pastimes : SI vs. iHub - Battle of the Boards -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (378)	4/13/2001 9:53:56 PM
From: Neenny	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1100

To keep it simple, I think it was just a situation where they had to make cuts, they reviewed both people's evaluations and decided that jeff was the one to keep, and bob was not. Don't ya wonder what the criterion for keeping Jeff vs Bob was??? Let's keep it simple.....can you say Vested Interest and Options?????? Wonder how the two compared on those???

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (378)	4/13/2001 10:00:13 PM
From: Chris land	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1100

<<<Then I think he was able to land a new job, and the people on silicon investor that wanted things run their way, decided to start a thread, trying to get members to leave silicon investor and join the new site.>>>> I fully concur! If I was SI Admin I would be taking real close notes as to who and what is being posted here, keeping in mind that many links on this thread send you directly over to SI's competitor iHub!. Chris

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (378)	4/13/2001 10:02:07 PM
From: Augustus Gloop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1100

<<Hows that for a good summation?>> Its your best one of the day. However; Bob is not behind this posting board in any way. I might also add that I agree with some of your other posts that imply that maybe there were reasons that Jeff was kept over Bob. Surprised? Well don't get too fired up yet. I think (personal opinion) the reason Bob was let go had little to do with his ability or work ethic. I think it had to do with his salary. As a long time employee I'm sure he was well compensated. Furthermore, I'm sure he had a healthy amount of options that were due him. Now IF I'm not mistaken ( and I could be ), Naveen has been accused of ditching employees that had large quantities of options due to them in the past. I think its a matter of public record that there are some legal proceedings with regard to this very issue. If so, is it out of the question to think that Bob was released not for work related issues but rather MONEY and options? I can't say for sure but that is my hunch. Now we all like to make money in the market at ALMOST any cost. But I myself find it hard to accept that a company would release people based purely on the almighty dollar. Does it happen every day? YEP! Is it right? Not in my neck of the woods. As far as bashing SI all I can say is for every action there is a reaction. I think the reaction you are seeing is not one of anti-Jeff but one of Pro- Bob. Had Robert been hated by SI posters I dont think you would see this kind of support.