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.

Non-Tech : Any info about Iomega (IOM)? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (37084)	11/23/1997 2:51:00 PM
From: Francis Muir	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

My take on the Darrell business. Something is going to happen rather shortly which will either cause IOM to tank, or, alternatively, to soar upwards on its merry way. This sounds to me like the results of a court decision. Personally I think that both possibilities are overblown, but i am fairly confident of a retreat -- for much the same reasons that Edwina is. I'll get back in on the way down as is my wont. FIDOUGH

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (37084)	11/23/1997 3:03:00 PM
From: FuzzFace	Respond to of 58324

SR. Don't be too angry with Darrell yet. A charitable read would be that he heard something, and being torn between the inevitable backlash he knew he'd receive here and feelings of responsibility to the thread, he tried to finesse it. But that approach is always doomed to failure. One should always either tell all, or just keep it to one's self. I was in the same quandry a few months ago, re the reflector. I chose total disclosure, because I was sure of my facts. If I wasn't, I wouldn't have said anything. I would hope D (and everyone here) would do the same. Let's wait for his next post before judging too harshly. And it goes without saying, just because it's written here on SI, doesn't make it true.