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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: llamaphlegm who wrote (13658)	8/15/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm	Respond to of 164684

Tom D: Thanks for the thougtful. of course, I disagree with virtually evertyhing that you wrote, but hey it's a discourse not a debate society. Glenn R: Thanks for the yoeman work on the 10Q. I've got a good deal of experience with these documents as well and yes that is not the simple boilerplate language. Rob S: Great article posted this am. William H: Please don't take this wrong way, but I'd think twice before getting snitty with Glenn because, a. he's pretty well got seniority on this board and that ought to count for a little something. and b. he's always (virtually) incredibly polite (far more than I can say for myself). Also, you may notice that Glenn painstakingly quotes from the 10Q and other sources (btw, please spare us the legal eagle copyright police shtick -- everyone here should know the law and we're all adults) and then makes his own analysis. You simply retort that MSFT's 10Q would probably scare off any bull if you believed the legalese. Uh, Bullsh-t! Instead of making sweeping assertions, you might consider responding to thorough research with some research of your own. Pull up the MSFT 10Q and do a section by section comparison (you may, also note that one company makes a truckload of $$$ and one does not -- details, details). LP