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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Night Writer who wrote (95263)	2/15/2002 11:35:09 AM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

"Somebody is taking greed pills and smoking stupid weed again. It sounds like stealing to me. " Well, sort of. I just love this (I made it up): Bill Parrish, the accountant who thinks Microsoft Employee Stock Options are fraudulent, is a CPA but he understands about half of accounting. The part he doesn't understand he thinks is a Communist Plot to make him look stupid. He is wrong about the Communist Plot Part. :)) ________________________________________________ NW: IBM got the 340MM!!! They actually recieved the money. This was, I assume what is called the total Amount Recieved, less taxes on that amount, if any. If for instance they had pumped money into that division prior to the sale and INCREASED expenses, then reducing those same expenses is not "stealing" and it arguable that since they did not tell you when the added the expenses, (normal course of business) they did not tell you when the subtracted the same expenses. But there are three problems, each of which have to do with investing. The first problem is the Yuppie dickheads (aka inexperienced face persons) who run mutual fund that invest money for others, who don't know what I just said, and the second problem is the fact that YOU criticize the attorneys who try to protect you by suing these people to stop this. That would stop it when it was small, and others would be afraid to issue opinions based on ignorance. And to protect these early people creates HUGE problems like we have now. And even though, legal action may have been taken by IBM, they would have been SCRUPULOUSLY careful to tell you what they were doing, at the time. So the next time you bad mouth an attorney, think about what you are saying. The third problem is the monumental amount of soft money floating around which seems to have corrupted the legislative process which has passed laws like mandatory arbitration (which sheilds brokerages and funds from corrective action), fed legislation (which protects banks and accounting firms) which encourages all this stuff to happen. Changing the rules will not help. It is is congressional smoke screen to avoid money sloshing. It is just not right.