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
How high will Microsoft fly?
An SI Board Since May 1996
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
74651 338 0 MSFT
Emcee:  Al Bearse Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
73801pass pass dumb dumb. Gates and Buffett play Bridge together. Both admire eachThe Duke of URL©-5/22/2003
73800i noticed the huge volume too today, perhaps Buffett is buying MSFT. Why not? Gapass pass-5/21/2003
73799There was a floor rumor of impending price cuts across the board, and I'm gu_warlock_-5/21/2003
737986 of one 1/2 dz of another >>>THOSE WHO DO NOT STUDY HISTORY, ARE CONDEAxxel-5/21/2003
73797And I agree with yours as well. AXXAxxel-5/21/2003
73796I doubt that they were holding their breath. Big move coming imho. Does not explsandeep-5/21/2003
73795Perhaps people are underwhelmed by the CEO conference. Charles Tutt (SM)Charles Tutt-5/21/2003
73794I could be dead wrong - but if you look at the wave structure, it looks like a fsandeep-5/21/2003
73793"The stock is probably starting its descent into sub-20 level" There The Duke of URL©-5/21/2003
73792The stock is probably starting its descent into sub-20 level and you guys are tasandeep-5/21/2003
73791Great post, but I'll give you hubris. In 1983 I spent $200,000 on a system The Duke of URL©-5/21/2003
73790<i>Perhaps you are suggesting that their real mistake was not inforcing thQwikSand-5/21/2003
73789<i>In one sense your comments are unnecessary; in another sense they are imiraje-5/21/2003
73788Interesting thoughts. Members of the IBM "skunkworks" have always spoThe Duke of URL©-5/21/2003
73787In one sense your comments are unnecessary; in another sense they are inane and The Duke of URL©-5/21/2003
73786"San Jose-based Phoenix" had a satellite office in San Jose later in tQwikSand-5/21/2003
73785By shenanigans, I meant the price action contrary to "news put out on the ssandeep-5/21/2003
73784No shenanigans...just a crummy company - an $11.00 stock selling at $25. Not roAxxel-5/21/2003
73783Some shenanigans must be going on with this stock. I think that it is unable to sandeep-5/21/2003
73782Just because something is on the Internet and indexed in Google doesn't meanCharles Tutt-5/21/2003
73781Google has some pretty good historical stuff: <i>...So IBM took their slaThe Duke of URL©-5/21/2003
73780<i>It may be, and I mean this in the nicest possible way, that if you are QwikSand-5/21/2003
73779"But does it matter?" Yes, I think in our not so perfect world, it woThe Duke of URL©-5/20/2003
73778I can't vouch for the placement of every point on the timeline. I don't QwikSand-5/20/2003
73777Much as this pains me, I think Junkeye is a little bit right. IBM had relied onThe Duke of URL©-5/20/2003
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
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News