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 : IFMX - Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Curbstone who wrote (12463)	12/4/1998 6:21:00 PM
From: Marq Spencer	Respond to of 14631

Mike, Most companies can not comment on rumors like this since it may have material impact on the stock of one or both parties. If this rumor is false, then to deny it would put LU in a bind - a subsequent rumor about a different acquisition which had some truth behind it could not be denied, and then saying "no comment" would imply that the situation was different than the IFMX one. Therefor, "no comment" is the standard reply when a company is asked if it is trying to buy/merge etc. with another. - Brian.

To: Curbstone who wrote (12463)	12/4/1998 6:29:00 PM
From: Marq Spencer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14631

>Or did the reporter ask a janitor or get a busy signal and interpret that as declining to comment.< Clearly someone at Lucent (possibly the janitor <bg>) was reached who declined to comment. Otherwise, the journalist would have written "LU could not be reached for comment" which is a euphemism for "they didn't even return my call". Most editors want to make sure that their reporters try to reach someone who is at least in PR and make sure that they make contact before publishing that the company declined to comment. BTW, if they reached the janitor or the guard, they would write "sources close to the company declined to comment" <vgb>. - Brian.