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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: semiconeng who wrote (145743)	10/19/2001 5:32:31 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

I would definitely rather have a company I invest in err on the side of better than average benefits. I'm sure the employees appreciate it and give one more for the Gipper, or Andy. It is possible to go to far, however, pre-Gerstner IBM coming to mind first. Tony

To: semiconeng who wrote (145743)	10/19/2001 8:22:02 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Semi, re: Probably true, most companies wouldn't go the extra mile. Maybe that's why I'm still here. I know that intel will do whatever it can, and use layoffs as the last resort, not the first. I agree. But in the clutch, stockholders (owners) matter more than employees. If you think that Intel is running a company to support it's employee's, you are (hopefully) wrong. I read a speech by a very enlightened CEO where he said "Most companies value their stockholders first, their customers second, and their employees third. I take care of my employees first, knowing that they will take care of my customers, and if that happens, my customers will take care of my stockholders". I'm not sure that works in an uncertain economy. Maybe it does. John