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 : COMS & the Ghost of USRX w/ other STUFF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scrapps who wrote (15478)	5/18/1998 3:32:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

....like a bunch of well dressed Mafia types. I'd rather deal with the mafia. At least when you pay them protection money they don't come into your place and bust it up.

To: Scrapps who wrote (15478)	5/18/1998 3:50:00 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22053

Well the MSFT arguments are pretty silly in trying to frame this conflict in terms of it being anti-innovative. I don't think any of the public speakers believe that this is anything but the most positive spin to put on it. I think it has been all along anti-competitive in the coercive nature of it's contracts. Otoh, forcing NSCP to be delivered is a rather crude attempt to level things out and I don't see that one as being sustained either. I think that the bigger risk to MSFT is that they will be declared to be a monopoly. Too bad all MSFT has been able to get is Haley Barbour as a spokesperson/consultant for TV talk PR. NSCP did much better by getting Bob Dole. That round at least goes to NSCP.