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 : Network Associates (NET) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (4506)	3/26/1999 1:51:00 AM
From: AlienTech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6021

>>This part of the article is frightening me:<< The part that frightens me more is the 600k revenue per employee! But I think I know what the problem is. When NETA bought SOLLY they used some weird gimmicks to do it. It was almost like you sold your Solly shares and bought NETA shares. I think this can be considered as a cash transaction and not a pooling of intrest. If this is true then NET Awill be showing a loss for the next decade. And to think MCAF could have bought SOLLY for 20 or so mil 2 years ago.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (4506)	3/26/1999 2:44:00 AM
From: Wigglesworth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6021

<<This part of the article is frightening me: Larson said then [Jan 6, 1999]that Network Associates could offset any reduction caused by a restatement with cost cutting and that the company remained comfortable with 1999 earnings estimates. Question to the thread: does this make sense to anyone? ... So why would a rational CEO attempt to cut costs as a response?>> What this thread needs is a fearless leader! Would we want our rep to hide under the table whenever Larson opens his mouth? Our treasured analyst is literally a pussy but Larson's NO pitbull!!! :-) The scary part makes perfect sense to me and seems to be totally harmless. Grammatically, the 'and' conjunction gives enough hint why he might want to cut cost.