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 : Data Broadcasting Corp. (DBCC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rajiv who wrote (4592)	2/1/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: peter michaelson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

Guys, I may be unwise to interfere, here, but please let's lay off the personal remarks. They do no good to anyone and just distract from the purpose of the thread. Reacting and defending oneself is useless as well. I think Rajiv may have erred in pouncing so quickly on that rumor, but everyone's entitled to a bad day or two (per week!). I've read Rajiv' posts for many months now, and they are almost always factual and useful. P.S. I was long DBCC for 9 (count 'em, 9) years, but recently went short. Best to all, peter

To: Rajiv who wrote (4592)	2/2/1999 4:30:00 AM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5102

Rajiv, a recap of the recent DBCC/MKTW pricing shows that DBCC is still too strong in comparison to MKTW. MTKW at $65 (which was my initial price expectation), doesn't mean more than $6-$8 7/8 to DBCC. DBCC renaining business valued at $7 + MKTW at $7 still yields only $14 for the whole chunk. Sodays ago I entered a new short at 22. What do you think? C.

To: Rajiv who wrote (4592)	2/2/1999 4:46:00 AM
From: SHGLaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5102

Spare us the sanctimonious crap. You attacked the guy for asking a question. No one including me thought the rumor had anything to it, but only you attacked and told him to stop posting. So save your Mr. Polite act for somewhere else. And DBCC announced that it was being added to the Naz Financial 100, an obscure and insignificant index. Whoever posted otherwise got it screwed up. The problem isn't long vs. short, its you implying someone is a liar for asking a question. SHG