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 : Source Media SRCM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pluvia who wrote (1564)	11/12/1998 3:35:00 PM
From: MW	Respond to of 3015

once again stevie is up to his old tricks. I wonder what has him so worried that he resorts to an OLD item which he has conveniently failed to address since it happened. Now all of a sudden he discovers this "new" issue and goes into his spin moves. Let's be clear about the WHOLE story in Michigan. <<<Many on this board have posted that IT will benefit from the MI lawsuit win over IMS. This is not true. While IMS was restrained from certain activities, what SRCM did not tell you was IMS was not required to recalling infringing catalogues or directories, as noted here in page 12 of the judges opinion in the MI case:>>> While this is absolutely true, it is also very misleading as it is IMMATERIAL because.. 1.Even though these catologues don't have to be recalled it doesn't mean that they are not causing damages. This case is not over. Step one was getting a prliminary injunction stopping IMS and Shell from doing any NEW business with those scripts and catalogues. They WERE GRANTED that injunction, a huge win. next they are sueing for damages on what has already happened. That is still to be decided. Look for the defendents to try to settle. 2.At the very least it forces IMS to create new ORIGINAL work to compete with SRCM thus giving SRCM more time to add to the significant headstart they already have. And who even cares if their is competition?? It will be a big market. Certainly big enough to share if that's how it turns out. It would be enough if SRCM captured a significant market share of this new market of which they are well on their way to doing. If you don't think preventing so called competition from selling their competing product that they likely infringed on from SRCM until they created their own original work isn't good for SRCM than you are beyond help. Not to mention the damage done to the reputations of Mike Shell and IMS as a result of this injunction. >>>As such, anyone who thinks IT will suddenly produce more revenue due to this preliminary injunction is crazy. Nothing that has happened in any of the litigation has gotten any of the customers that left SRCM to go back to SRCM. >>. Again spinmeister steve. SRCM doesn't care if they get those customers back. The fact that the competition can't compete until they create their own product and the negative publicity your buddies received in light of their slap in the face in Michigan will most definitely help create more revenue for SRCM. More revenue from NEW customers like Nynex. <<<This leads me to believe SRCM will continue to ~net~ lose business - not gain business. They have a bad rep in the biz...>>> Spin spin spin baby you're getting dizzy. Talk about bad reps??? Getting an injunction slapped in your face on a new business because of the likelihood that you did something illegal is a good rep?? If that's who SRCM has to worry about competing with I'm comfortable. mw

To: Pluvia who wrote (1564)	11/12/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: tom rusnak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3015

3rd Quater results: biz.yahoo.com

To: Pluvia who wrote (1564)	11/12/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3015

Minus 76 cents. Penny below the low estimate, a quarter below the high. But, record revenues so watch for that spin before tomorrow's open.