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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: xstuckey who wrote (70163)	12/23/1998 4:04:00 PM
From: JDN	Respond to of 186894

Dear X: Unless he pisses off a CEO more powerful than he. JDN

To: xstuckey who wrote (70163)	12/23/1998 4:05:00 PM
From: Diamond Jim	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

X,re: "Say what you will about Kurlak, when holding a position opposite his viewpoint, he sure is a formidable opponent." I know what you mean but in the long run he is irrelevant, Intel has gone from 65 to 125 with him badmouthing it every step of the way. I also realize he is part of the reason it went to 65. Still it is nice to see him admit he was WRONG! and he did make it tough to hold on thru all those dips. jim

To: xstuckey who wrote (70163)	12/23/1998 4:12:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

X, >>>Say what you will about Kurlak, when holding a position opposite his viewpoint, he sure is a formidable opponent." Not sure about that any more. Remember Dick Whittington (WHO?) of Soundview? Back to Kurlak, I don't think he had been exactly deified even when he was "on top". Now he should be judged by the what have you done for me lately theory, and I don't mean his reverse today on Intel. Speaking of reverses, Kurlak's calls before today on Intel would be akin to going into a game against the Dolphins and telling the defense to not worry about Dan Marino's passing. Tony