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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KeepItSimple who wrote (56680)	5/14/1999 2:53:00 AM
From: Bill Harmond	Respond to of 164685

>>I noticed that you insulted Lou Gerstner. No. I'd have insulted Lou if I said he was pimping for his biggest customer, but I didn't. :)

To: KeepItSimple who wrote (56680)	5/14/1999 2:24:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 164685

I noticed that you insulted Lou Gerstner. Not surprising. Whenever I presented you with facts that shattered your childish illusions of what a profitable company is, Well, fwiw there was a lot of noise about IBM/Gerstner in Austin when I was there. The consensus on Gerstner is that he is a cost cutter only ... a number cruncher and not a visionary. Similar to the Ray Lane situation at Oracle. Come to think of it I haven't seen anything revolutionary coming out of IBM in 10+ years... we walloped their PC subsidiary at Dell by utilizing techniques and software IBM claims to have "invented". Once again I guess it all comes down to people that value companies on earnings vs. innovation. Innovation costs money but sets you up for earnings over the long haul imo. Oracle was hugely profitable in 1995-6. Too bad Ray Lane was evaluated on his ability to "deliver the numbers". Had they invented something new maybe they wouldn't be in the soup they are in today.