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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (21543)	11/18/1998 3:55:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Thanks for the clarifications. Perhaps you could clear up some points: I belive that Standard had a tight grip on the service station business at one point. Even when I was a child they were omnipresent. Was this true and was it true before the antitrust suit? Also, was there more than one antitrust action, and how long did the legal actions last? Finally, I had thought that the enforcement actions of the Pinkertons and railroads in Rockefellers behalf, and the general atmosphere of physical intimidation in the 1920s, were pretty well documented. At least so I was taught in school. Are you sure about this? Chaz

To: rudedog who wrote (21543)	11/18/1998 4:29:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

rudedog, since you apparently have knowledge of the Standard Oil situation, can you confirm whether a Standard Oil shareholder actually came out ahead after the breakup? My investment guy (who has a bunch of msft) tells me that holding through the Std Oil breakup was very profitable, allowing for the release of additional value in shares of the spinoff companies. Do you know if that is true? (they didnt mention it on the A&E documentary I saw) Michelle

To: rudedog who wrote (21543)	11/18/1998 4:33:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Unfortunately MSFT is hardly the leader here - the cable companies are way ahead of Bill in terms of clever hidden taxes. Don't go bringing up the cable guys, rudedog- I had it in for them long before I understood the integrity and uniformity of the Windows experience. Nobody could accuse them of being politically naive - first get all the cosy monopoly franchise agreements set up, then go over local government's heads to Congress and get themselves deregulated. Plus they bought up all the programming sources during the sleepwalking Reagan antitrust era. TCI is supposed to be quite the expert at strong arm tactics too, whenever franchise renewal time comes around. Then there's the RBOCs, who want to figure out how to leverage their monopoly into the cable market while maintaining the phone service monopoly. If somebody could figure out how to get those two sets of crooks to actually compete with each other, I'd be a happy camper. Heck, I'd be relatively happy if either my phone company or cable company would get around to offering cable modems or DSL at reasonable rates locally. I'm supposed to live in one of the internet service hotbeds of the country, but no concrete plans on either from TCI or Ameritech, that I've heard of. You know Bob Metcalfe? Ever read his infoworld column? A guy after my own heart, equal disdain for all monopolists. Cheers, Dan.