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: wanna_bmw who wrote (172911)	2/7/2003 5:23:09 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan's allusion to anthrax was metaphorical and you keep bringing it up time and time again as fait acompli, it does not do your argument well. Carl is not a communist for demanding disclosure on the amount and type of stock options given. Yes, it can sort of be pieced together from the filings, BUT it should not be the duty of the shareholder to ferret out the information. Perhaps his animosity would be alleviated by some disclosure of the real facts. True, it is inappropriate to disclose some things as they do give the competition an advantage, but this is not one of them. A Shareholder has a right to know about dilution of stock. If shareholder rights in the last five years had not be decimated by Congress and the Courts, this would not be an issue. Nor is it the least bit significant what any other company in the world has done. This is Intel, this is an Intel shareholder.

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (172911)	2/7/2003 9:56:41 PM
From: carl a. mehr	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

It disturbs me when Amy J. in post # 172828 seem to praise Mr. Dunlap. She wrote: At an SI lunch a few years ago, someone explained (forgot who) what Dunlap's secret sauce for success on avoiding anti-trust issues is. He intimidates the executives. Apparently, he runs around and scares the dickens out of people by jumping into their offices unexpectedly and demanding to investigate on the fly as if he were the gov't. Keeps the execs from even thinking about doing anything wrong and it sends the message that he's dead serious about getting after an exec if they even think about doing anything wrong. wanna_bmw writes: So now you think Intel is made up of a bunch of immoral thugs, huh? Their actions speaks louder than my words. I would certainly hate to believe that, but there clearly are some shades of truth in that statement. Inside Intel by Tim Jackson He tells about the legal department suing everyone in sight in order to hold on the its monopoly power. Many of these law suits were of a frivolous nature designed to delay competition. Intel's legal department spent hundreds of millions of dollars. At one point, the general counsel who headed it was told that one of the targets that he would have to meet in order to get a good performance appraisal was a fixed number of new lawsuits to start each quarter. All I am asking for from Intel is honesty in their reporting of earnings, especially at this time when the earnings are being used to repurchase shares recklessly doled out. I find it disturbing that the Inner Circle have sold their soul for a few shekels of gold...humble carl

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (172911)	2/8/2003 10:48:43 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Respond to of 186894

So now you think Intel is made up of a bunch of immoral thugs, huh? How original. From Inside Intel: The strategic lawsuit -- designed to distract and slow down a competitor rather than to seek reparation for any violation of the law -- is another high-tech business concept that Intel appears to have invented. The book reveals that Grove actually required Intel's general counsel to bring two lawsuits per quarter in order to meet his objectives. Actually, I think more than a few might consider this practice to be immoral and a form of thuggery. So, I doubt Carl is original in this regard. Are you going to start posting like Dan3 about Intel sending anthrax through the mail system or plotting along side Osama bin Ladan? Your repeated attempts to discredit Dan3 for what was obvious hyperbole simply confirms you as a Intel stooge. Dan invites enough genuine criticism that you need not continuously go there. THE WATSONYOUTH