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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gbh who wrote (47028)	2/14/1999 11:41:00 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Gary, My, how your argument has changed. First, it was "Dell will definitely not miss its #s." Now, it is, "they aren't going to miss by enough to matter." We will get you to cross the road to the tree of knowledge soon. <G> MB

To: gbh who wrote (47028)	2/14/1999 12:37:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Gary, >>>Way too much at risk for anyone leak information as specific as what he posted. <<< I agree. However, the leak scenario is very compelling and for a lot of people would make sense. If the CEO were Jerry Sanders, I could believe it. If the CEO were Eckhard Pfeifer, I would find it much harder to beleive. It is much too risky. If the CEO were Lou Gerstner, I could see where if he did it, he would do it so well that no one would ever know. But, still, I wouldn't believe he would do it. As for Michael Dell - No way. First of all, I think he has such personal integrity, that there is no way that he would consider it even if he had to do it. Secondly, there is no reason for him to do it. If the numbers aren't there, he is going to take the hit now and get a correction over with. Just like Bill gates, these guys are shrewd enough to know that it is not good for them, if their prices get way ahead of themselves. Microsft for example has very conservative accounting methods and probably manipulate their financial reporting in the other direction - hiding revenues and delay their recognition as revenue for as long as possible. These methods are probably just as questionable as those that inflate revenues and earnings - but in the long run these methods are much, much more effective. Getting back to Michael Dell - what would his motives be. He is not ready to sell his business. He is not ready to retire. If anybody is investing in Dell for the long haul, it is Michael Dell. What difference would it make to him if his net worth is plus or minus several billion dollars in the next quarter or so. Regardless of what happens, he will still be a multibillionaire. It's not going to change his life style one iota. Michael Dell is a smart guy and he is pretty confident that he has considerable growth left. Right now he has less than 10% of the PC market - I would not be surprised if he didn't think he could eventually achieve 25% market share. Letting the shares run far ahead of itself now would be one of the last thing that he would want. Regards, Mary PS: Personal disclosure - I sold my shares at 108+. I have been in and out of Dell Since 1994. I would much rather have stayed in Dell all along and accumulated on dips.