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 : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rhet0ric who wrote (13328)	5/10/1998 10:52:00 PM
From: Travis	Respond to of 213182

Nice comments on Gil's book. Yeah, it's a hard one to figure out. You feel like you are getting the 2nd side of the story (and let me tell you, no matter how clear cut something looks-there are ALWAYS 2 sides to the story), but it's hard to decide how much to believe. I feel that if Gil negotiated with the board for a huge salary and got it, and someone doesn't like it, they should be mad at the BOARD, not Gil. Who can blame a guy for not trying to get compensated as much as possible? It's the board who was moronic for accepting it. Also-I think Gil's assessment of many execs was correct. They were do-nothings. Even Steve unkowingly agreed by canning many of them himself, something Gil should've done long ago. This action by Steve seems to me to indicate that Gil was very correct in his assessment of many execs. All in all, Gil deserves more credit than he got, or at least he doesn't deserve as much criticism as he's received. BUT, Steve is clearly the one for the job, and he's clearly the one to revive Apple. It just wasn't in Gil, no matter how much credit he does deserve. go aapl!!! :)