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 : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank Sheridan who wrote (7417)	9/18/1998 6:14:00 PM
From: Sleeperz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16960

Of course publicaly traded companies like TDFX don't really care about #3, the Investors. #1 is the company founders and owners who own the majority of the company when it was private. They then take it public through an IPO to rake in money for themselves (from options, etc) and raise capital for the #2 concern, the Company. The investors, #3 get the leftovers, crumbs, etc. If there are bondholders the investors are #4. If the company was highly profitable they would have kept it a private company. But they have to rake in the moula some how and the best way is by selling a good story and paper to investors (Re: suckers). Welcome to Capitalism and the new Wall Street. Interesting a lot of the big brokerages sold themselves to banks just before the market tanked! 1 more Sign of a market top along with lots of IPOs. CL >>> Not to be crass, but hasn't it become obvious that TDFX doesn't give a f**k about their shareholders? Really, has there ever been a company that has been more indifferent to their investors? <<<<

To: Frank Sheridan who wrote (7417)	9/18/1998 8:30:00 PM
From: Simon Cardinale	Respond to of 16960

Frank: 3Dfx's attitude toward shareholders Not to be crass, but hasn't it become obvious that TDFX doesn't give a fk about their shareholders? Really, has there ever been a company that has been more indifferent to their investors? Take a look at the Russell 2000. Compare it to TDFX. Blaming 3Dfx management for much of the big slide is fairly pointless. The last few days is another matter, but it's peanuts beside the big fall from $35. And none of it happened because they don't "care." Everyone spent a lot of energy yelling for press releases, but when they came they did - no good. Everyone wanted them to make money, and they did - no help there. Now we're in a period where there's bad news in our recent past and possibly on the near horizon, so complaints have gained some credibility, but they're doing the same stuff they were on the rise to $35 when no one was complaining Perhaps we should have been. They're not perfect, particularly in communicating earnings expectations to analysts. However saying they don't care doesn't really fit the facts too well. You think they are doing interviews with the Motley Fool because they don't care? They may have screwed up Q3, but I doubt it was out of malice toward you or I. Here's an interesting question, if 3Dfx's guidance (chip sales and earnings) had been more on track for the previous 2 quarters, might the inventory backlog that screwed Q3 have been averted? Simon