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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: X-Ray Man who wrote (14390)	1/16/1999 9:30:00 AM
From: J. P.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

<<The split is currently anticipated in the price.>> I agree that a fallback will occur if no split is announced. But I think there's always at least 5 points in the actual announcement of a split, because of the doubt. For stockholders this is of no real consequence, but for options holders, 5 points can equate to a lot of money.

To: X-Ray Man who wrote (14390)	1/16/1999 3:10:00 PM
From: Zanga56	Respond to of 74651

I think there will be a 2:1 split. My reasoning is as follows: BillG has right now 21% or about 532 million shares. A 2:1 will give him over 1 billion shares. This way it will be easier to calculate his worth.

To: X-Ray Man who wrote (14390)	1/16/1999 3:47:00 PM
From: ed	Respond to of 74651

Good luck for your short position on Microsoft. There are a lot of positive factors are not built into Microsoft stock yet. 1) New products released. 2) DOJ so far did not prove a dam thing that Microsoft had Monopoly in OS. If Microsoft had monopoly in the OS market, then Microsoft should maximize the price of OS, but that is not the case. The DOJ did not either know what is the definition of monopoly power. If Microsoft feel a threat of other companies' products to its OS , then Microsoft did not have a monopoly, because the competition did exist in the market. Someone said Microsoft sold the OS with low price to maintain its monopoly power, and this is a wild speculation, the judge should rule the case based on FACTs, not the wild speculation. A man owned a gun did not mean he will commit a murder. A man had a car did not mean he will kill some one on the highway on purpose.