SI
SI
discoversearch

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

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (7683)6/5/2002 9:09:54 PM
From: Robert Scott Diver  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 8218
 
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but your saying "3) Debt is debt. You can identify it to financing operations if you like, but it's still on the balance sheet. Are you suggesting that if the financing deals all went belly up, the company could walk away from the debt?" makes no sense to me. Should I conclude that you think financial institutions with "massive debt" are poor investments. S&P reiterated their very high ratings of IBM's debt just today. Do you know something they don't. What was your point when you mentioned "massive debt" along with a bunch of other perceived negatives. What, specifically, is negative about IBM's debt?



To: Charles Tutt who wrote (7683)6/5/2002 9:56:21 PM
From: smchan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8218
 
Concerning McNealy of Sun; consider the source. IIRC, Sun tried to hide those now infamous cache problems and failed to step up to the plate and fix them as they should've. It doesn't surprise me to see McNealy pass the buck regardless of who was at fault.

USENET is also full of reports about what great performers IBM drives are. They are the drive of choice for cloners. It's sad to see IBM sell those assets.

Sam


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News