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 F. Dowd who wrote (66950)	4/9/2002 11:05:20 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Respond to of 74651

'hey Duke: What do you think of this comment: But as in the past three weeks, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar- Kotelly declined to rule. ' rule on what?

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (66950)	4/9/2002 11:42:26 PM
From: jonkai	Respond to of 74651

In that ruling, the Appeals Court noted that the Supreme Court has ruled that antitrust decrees by necessity involve predictions and assumptions concerning future economic and business events Does this attitude have legal legs? it depends on if you think the appeals court went over every single antitrust ruling that is in any way similar to the MSFT one with a fine tooth comb, and made sure every single word they uttered would hold up in a supreme court review...... which they did..... so again, you shareholders are betting a mighty fine amount of money that is on a 50/50 horse at best...... i hope you all know it, because this is no longer investing with those odds, it is gambling at its highest form.... good luck, you will need it..... jon.

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (66950)	4/9/2002 11:51:19 PM
From: David Howe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

I'm not sure if it has legs or not, but it probably doesn't matter that much. She might rule that the remedy must make assumptions about the future or something to that effect, but I doubt that the remedy will be harsh enough to have a significant effect on MSFT. The DOJ is arguing with MSFT that the remedy / settlement is sufficient. Will the judge really deviate dramatically from this? I doubt it. She might give the competitors a bit more, but she would be going out on a serious limb to deviate dramatically from what our nation's Department of Justice has recommended. She'd risk a complete reversal by the Supreme Court. My guess is that she either accepts the settlement terms and rejects the remaining state's arguments entirely, or she gives a taste of success to the states so they can claim a minor victory. Besides, what's the worst that can happen? MSFT must turn over more of their code? They just sue anyone that uses their code illegally. It's a minor problem that they wouldn't have complete control, but all this would do is level the playing field a bit, not harm MSFT. And, if they have to offer another version of Windows with less features? So what, they take a one time charge for the costs involved with deleting a bunch of files (oversimplification, but it's not really that tough for them to do). All future versions of Windows could be made with a "lite" version as well. The costs aren't that great and they could actually raise prices for the full version to make up for it. The state's proposed remedy doesn't sound that bad to me, and it would just lead to MSFT raising prices somewhat. Not that I think the states will be even modestly successful, but for worst case sakes, what's the big deal? How exactly will the state's proposed remedies effect MSFT if by some fluke they are successful? Dave

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (66950)	4/11/2002 3:44:58 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 74651

Note that the linc is an xml linc... the ONLY kind I will use. :)) States' [Expert] witness won't endorse proposed remedy By Cara Garretson April 11, 2002 9:20 am PT [I might add that the only REAL purpose of this hearing is to have expert testimony as to the remedy, the states may have a problemo when their ONLY expert witness doesn't seem to agree with their own suggested remedies. Word on the street is that now they are going to call Bathstar and Dave(D) as experts] WASHINGTON -- DURING the Microsoft remedy hearing Thursday morning, an economist and expert witness for the states suing Microsoft backed off from supporting one of the key remedies proposed by the states, claiming he didn't have the technical background to weigh in on the merits of the provision. Carl Shapiro, a professor of business strategy at the University of California at Berkeley's Haas School of Business, testified in favor of a number of states' remedies that he believes may work to restore competition in the PC operating system market. Last year a U.S. court of appeals... infoworld.com credit stanton2 for the find.