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.

Non-Tech : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Coley who wrote (9400)	4/24/1999 10:51:00 AM
From: Michael M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

Michael - It's not "interesting," it's "unacceptable." I have half a notion to ask the authorities to take a look at how Iomega does business; especially when it comes to being straight-forward with its shareholders. Frankly, I think Iomega has two kinds of shareholders: there's David Dunn and there's the rest of us. I don't know if Dunn's interests are the same as ours. Maybe yes, maybe no. If there are enough of us of like mind, perhaps it's possible to have Dunn "removed?" I'm getting tired of all the top-secret stuff. BTW - thanks for all the work you do to dig out facts and present them so clearly to the rest of us. Mike

To: Michael Coley who wrote (9400)	4/24/1999 9:47:00 PM
From: Naggrachi	Respond to of 10072

<< I find it interesting that the sale actually closed on April 6, but Iomega didn't mention it in their conference call.>> Something has drastically changed here, no? This company is being run like a boiler room operation. They should merge with CPQ, they'll complment each other very nicely. This is why DELL is DELL and IOM is IOM. There's a reason why its equity is priced at $5, and it's not by mistake. Rocky my man, you've right all along!!! No need to send people to jail, make your point and let the market's action prove you right. Zead