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

To: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (1972)	12/12/1997 10:42:00 AM
From: J R KARY	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8218

Guts ? Where's the mention of MSFT or INTC ? now that takes guts Then Jules you would be writing to Mer. Lyn. complaining about him (IBM analyst) but instead it looks like somebody wrote to the WSJ's version of Ann Landers. IBM buying its own stock , while both its price and revenues climb , is not in the interest of share holders ? What tripe ! Would it be better for IBM to have its capital wasted by having investors subjected to dividend income tax ? The WSJ gang was probably accumulating IBM at 101 yesterday ! I might even sell them a little of my shares when IBM clears $125 just before the 5th aniversary of Lou's "Great Annual Adventure".

To: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (1972)	12/12/1997 12:27:00 PM
From: Harry Landsiedel	Respond to of 8218

Jules B. Garfunkel.Re: "Thank you very much for remembering." How could I forget? I was fat dumb and happy with my IBM at the time counting the profits and complacent about the future. Then you disected the numbers for us. Sold the last bit at 105 and very happy to do so. I didn't realize this was a new analyst. But I agree. Where is everybody else? My feeling is that most on the street do not really understand technology but big blue (and to some degree HP) make them feel comfortable so they hold those and consider themselves invested in the technology sector. HL