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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (6495)	12/15/1997 1:19:00 PM
From: kech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Maurice - Surely you jest that you think there is no need to regulate or control any kind of monopoly? History serves many examples of extreme abuse. Go talk to farmers trying to ship their grain when only one railroad would charge whatever the traffic would bear. More interesting is the case when monopolists use their position in one market to INCREASE their monopoly in adjoining markets. They thereby drive out the possibility for innovation and efficiency in those adjoining markets which you champion. An example might be a commercial waste hauler that owns the local landfill and raises the price to monopoly levels. Not only does the landfill monopolist (if unregulated) make a killing on the landfill but they can also use this to drive out competition in the waste hauling part of the business. Any innovation that competition or entry in waste hauling might provide - say better service or lower rates or both - is not allowed to occur. To be more specific, this is exactly the case that Reno is concerned about for Microsoft and its Browser business. If Microsoft uses its position in OS to drive out Netscape in Browsers it will not be Netscapes inefficiency or lack of innovation in browsers that is the source of its failure. Since it essentially started the market I'm sure you would agree with me on that. In brief, there is a role for regulation and oversight, for maintaining a sufficiently level playing field to allow innovation and competition and the pursuit of transient monopolies to continue. I agree with you that this oversight must be exercised very carefully, and there are many examples of government agencies going overboard and unnecessarily denting the innovation that they should be in charge of protecting. But, not having participated in the thrill of transient monopoly, what can you expect from civil servants? Apologies to Ramsey for this political digression.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (6495)	12/15/1997 1:19:00 PM
From: John Hayman	Respond to of 152472

Mqurice, Come on, don't repress those feelings, tell us how you really feel! And.....then get this stock moving in one direction so we can make a decision. Later, John

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (6495)	12/15/1997 1:21:00 PM
From: qdog	Respond to of 152472

When Gates and his barrons get off the kick about monoplies that exist in the telcom industry, then I'll relent. I'm tired of his whining about the telcom monopoly when he is trying to be the only monopoly in not just computing. He's earmarking entertainment, TV, Internet, computing, telco; in other words he becoming the most dangerous of all sort, the controller of all means of information and telecommunication. Sorry but unlike your sheep, I'm not following this geek. Fk him, I'm going Unix with my next machine. I'm trading in MS Office for Lotus. I agree with the Japanese males, I think Janet is sexy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think his OS should sell for $10, then you'll see an immediate drop in computer prices. Asshole is still charging top dollar for Win95, when it will be replaced by '98 shortly. Then a new round of US having to buy at higher levels to enjoy his vision!!!! Not me sparky!!! Look what happen when INTC got serious competition; their overpricing came back to earth. Even high end Pentiums are cheap!! Not monopolistic MSFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!** This editorial is bought to you on behalf of all us lazy and stupid telecommunication engineers that didn't get out..