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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/16/1998 1:21:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 93625

"Intel is at odds with Rambus"... More from your "highly confidential source"? Mr. Costello, I think most here are aware of your modus operandi....

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/16/1998 1:40:00 PM
From: Scrapps	Respond to of 93625

Why not save yourself the effort Costello! Your post is pure poppycock without providing a source to substantiate it. It tells us what your profile does...nothing. Come on man get with it! :o(

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/16/1998 1:57:00 PM
From: Boplicity	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

#%^#%&%&^%#@) I know who you are so does the SEC. Better get it together, or you will do time. Greg

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/16/1998 2:37:00 PM
From: Teri Stephenson	Respond to of 93625

Mr. Costello, There is more bad news to come. I always welcome NEWS both positive and negative on stocks I own; even like to hear a rumor now and then(as long as it is presented as such). The problem with your posts on SI is that every one thus far(since 12/11/97) has been negative unsubstantiated gossip from your highly confidential inside sources regarding RMBS. Give us a break! I welcome some posts from you from VERIFIABLE sources so I can check them out myself. Teri

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/16/1998 4:33:00 PM
From: Michel Bera	Respond to of 93625

Edgar, I have to agree with Betty that most people in this thread try to post news that all can cross-check, or personal opinions. Many thread members here have industry insider relationships, but never mention them, especially anonymously, outside of personal e-mail, as a rule. I think that Intel's interest is to keep some kind of pressure on Rambus as a negotiation strategy. Look at Intel vs. Microsoft on set-top boxes. But I think designs cannot be changed every "five minutes". That is why I wait until next August, or a strong technological innovation challenging clearly RMBS offering, to move my RMBS line. Just my opinion. Michel Bera

To: Edgar Costello who wrote (2784)	1/17/1998 12:47:00 PM
From: Louis XIX	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

I took a look at the IPO prospectus and the 10-K form of december and analyze for fun and found some interesting things... Everybody knows that SEC rules required to report executives, directors and person or entity that own more than 5% of common stock. The facts : March 31 December 1st Owners Shares % Shares % Merill, Pickard, Anderson & Eyre 2,491,516 11.6 1,776,516 7.9 Mohr, Davidow Venture II 2,491,516 11.6 1,613,516 7.2 Goldman Sachs 1,411,765 7.5 1,270,588 5.6 Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers 2,391,516 11.6 ??? ? Dominion Income Management 1,045,598 5.6 ??? ? Integral Capital Management 1,045,599 5.6 ??? ? Executives and directors 10,031,484 52.3 8,175,409 35.6 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ N.B. 1) The amounts of shares of directors include shares of VCs entities that they are related to. 2) Total shares was 21,453,651 in march and 22,569,542 in december (according to documents) As you can see executives, directors ans VCs still own an important portion of the company. For the three VCs that have question marks in december or they sold everything or they have less than 5% who knows ? My question is if your source is right why WELL INFORMED VCs would stay in that business ? My small ownership does not give access to the information that those big guys have. So I think that if they are still there, it is probably not on H&Q advice but on their own research dept. Regards, Louis