SI
SI
discoversearch

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
All About Sun Microsystems
An SI Board Since December 1996
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
64865 326 0 JAVA
Emcee:  Carmine Cammarosano Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
62590I think it was the break dancers that sealed it....cfimx-1/11/2005
62589I wonder what it means when the "top device" shown at CES is an absurdQwikSand-1/11/2005
62588>>room222, an argument with the premise that "McNealey is not buying&cfimx-1/10/2005
62587room222, an argument with the premise that "McNealey is not buying" isrkral-1/10/2005
62586i suggest you go back and take logic 101. that's NOT an argument. just beccfimx-1/10/2005
62585room222, with lots less words you could have said ... "<I>I know of rkral-1/10/2005
62584its not about "founders" its about having money (yes) demonstrating cocfimx-1/10/2005
62583room222, that McNealey hasn't purchased SUNW *doesn't* impress me. Can yrkral-1/10/2005
62582careful with da noise... mcnealy would buy the stock if he thought it would go cfimx-1/9/2005
62581LOL. Of course! And they weren't all written by Janice Winsor, either! ChCharles Tutt-1/9/2005
62580lol that was good!John Carragher-1/9/2005
62579Was there more than one book in it? 8-) --QSQwikSand-1/9/2005
62578I noticed at my local Border's when I was there today that they now have a &Charles Tutt-1/9/2005
62577I know that when my company IPO'd, I had enough founder's stock that buyCharles Tutt-1/8/2005
62576(With apologies to Charles) For the obvious reason that "cheap" is noQwikSand-1/8/2005
62575really? how so?cfimx-1/8/2005
62574I think I DID address your post. Since you didn't get it, the point is thatCharles Tutt-1/8/2005
62573that was a very clever way of not addressing the post but you've had a lot cfimx-1/8/2005
62572I assume you know what they say about assumptions. The same goes for presumptioCharles Tutt-1/8/2005
62571let me put it another way... presumably if msft was "cheap" gates woulcfimx-1/8/2005
62570Someone on Yahoo! pointed this out: gridtoday.com Charles Tutt (SM)Charles Tutt-1/8/2005
62569What does that have to do with whether founders should buy more stock? Charles Charles Tutt-1/7/2005
62568room222, re "<I>because the rule may just have been implemnted(sic).&rkral-1/7/2005
62567not really comparable in that sun micro is a money losing turnaround and msft iscfimx-1/7/2005
62566McNealy has tons of founder's stock. I don't see Bill Gates buying sharCharles Tutt-1/7/2005
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News