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 : COMS & the Ghost of USRX w/ other STUFF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (21381)	7/12/2001 4:31:56 AM
From: Scrapps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

"I don't believe the government should be in the business of removing those people from the helm; that's the job of the BOD. But, if the BOD won't act and control their executives, where does that leave us?" Where it leaves us is with crimes or no crimes being committed, then if evidences indicates...charges against each person are required for the crimes they are allege to have done...and a trial is held for each one of them. Kind like the "Law of the land" concept. I think we mostly agree, however, I believe very strongly in one-man accountability, and We All must be held responsible for our actions. Not the Company or the BOD, but rather the individual for each crime he or she may have done, No matter how many crimes are attributed to the Company or BOD. As for the IBM thing...IBM won against the government, but later blundered by not buying, but instead licensing from Bill Gates. IBM blundered again when they failed to realize the impact and market for the "Personal Computer". Apple snuck in and things were nip and tuck. ATT was a Public Utility, meaning they were protected from competition for a long long time, because it was a benefit to the country as a whole. Meaning we paid for it! However, and it never was meant to last in that protected fashion. Public Utilities are meant to be dissolved or broken up at the appropriate time when the people don't require them to be protected. In actuality the same has been true with the USPS (Post Office) and others. You are right about competition being the main benefit of the AT&T break-up, but I'd even argue that it came too late, but that is hindsight I'll admit. "As I've said, I'm not necessarily an advocate of breaking up the company, but if it happens there is every reason to believe that the sum of the parts will be greater than the whole. " I also agree with you about MSFT being better off being split, and do think they will do it on their own once the courts back off. It only makes sense to me.