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 : INPR - Inprise to Borland (BORL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: max who wrote (381)	6/30/1998 12:39:00 AM
From: TTOSBT	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5102

Re: >"Are you basing this statement of fact on the stock price alone?"< What else do you suggest we base it on? Our money goes into the stock, the company doesn't give us any guidance, the only news is when a product update or new product is released and no brokerage firms are telling their clients to strongly or otherwise buy it. So the only measurement we have is the trading stock price. There is no insight by anyone who has any knowledge to buy and seemingly just the opposite, they are all selling it while we sit here waiting to hear why? Del has missed the ball more then once, twice, three times even, he should be taken out enough is enough TTOSBT

To: max who wrote (381)	6/30/1998 1:30:00 AM
From: Kashish King	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

Are you basing this statement of fact on the stock price alone? I am willing to withhold judgement for another quarter or two. That's what every money-losing company wishes shareholders would do: wait for a few quarters before passing judgement. That's bad advice, revenues have been falling and INPR needs to be put on notice that they need to work within a profitable framework because we're not willing to lend them money for another acquisition like the last. When they print more shares for AQs they are taking money right out of your pocket, particularly when they add another money-losing outfit to the fold. Where is the explanation of Sippl's departure? This is a publicly held company, isn't it? Maybe that's not how INPR management sees it; maybe shareholders are simply a necessary evil whose pockets can be picked, er, leveraged to gamble on this strategy or that. Should the bet turn out successful you win; otherwise you lose; either way the CEO gets paid obscene amounts. They paid 200 plus million to acquire a struggling ORB developer with an implementation of an open standard which is increasingly being bundled for free. An Iona license would have been preferable.