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
COMS/USRX
An SI Board Since February 1997
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
1384 5 0 COMS
Emcee:  Jeffery E. Forrest Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
834 To All: posted on Newsroom - Todays News - at: dbc.com Hayes just signed withDouglas Perkins-3/13/1997
833 Stau, >>My point was that just because USRX is trading at a lower than 1Hassell Anderson-3/13/1997
832 COMS has a low PE compare with other networking company. CSCO, NTAP BAY all hahenry s choi-3/13/1997
831 GW, <i>RAPT appears to be a good buy.</i> It's got a PE from MEric Prigge-3/13/1997
830 3COM and RAPT appears to be a good buy.GW-3/13/1997
829 Sometime in June is the closest I've heard to an actual date. ScrappsScrapps-3/13/1997
828 Can anyone tell me the date this merger is going to take place? Thanks eh!David Lawrenz-3/13/1997
827 Okay. Sorry. I thought you were implying that one could move independently of tDavid Lawrence-3/12/1997
826 You aren't telling me anything new here. We all know that USRX and COMS wilStau-3/12/1997
825 The Motley Fool is not a fool. He's a MORON. Yes, he and he alone is the onStau-3/12/1997
824 Stau, First, the analysis to which you referred was from Briefing.com and was David Lawrence-3/12/1997
823 As you well know, 9 Months in the networking industry is "forever". Stau-3/12/1997
822 Buying USRX to get COMS cheap (today) doesn't make any sense at all. The onStau-3/12/1997
821 Kind of a mixed bag actually. I think the writer did most of his research on thDavid Lawrence-3/12/1997
820 Any gues/analysis on what will be the effect of CSCO, MSFT, INTC joint announceJoe S Pack-3/12/1997
819 Motley Fool coverate of COMS/USRX merger continues: Labeled "Why U. S. RoDick Smith-3/12/1997
818 Ben the name is "Cowell" not Cowdell. And it is easy to understand yScrapps-3/12/1997
817 Ben, The article below is from Briefing.com. . . . U.S. Robotics and 3Com DaiHassell Anderson-3/12/1997
816 Tom, I am not saying in a long term, COMS/USRX merger is a bad deal. I just felben luong-3/12/1997
815 <<Wigglesworth, Off the record. Are you related to the machinery selling Wigglesworth-3/11/1997
814 >>Jim Olson, 3Com's senior vice president of WAN operations, said theMichael Anthony-3/11/1997
813 Wigglesworth, Off the record. Are you related to the machinery selling WiggleWhiskey-3/11/1997
812 3Com 2Way article: Supporting Rival Standards -- 3Com tries to have it both waWigglesworth-3/11/1997
811 Dust Announced Settled! It's safe now to predict stock prices, everyone: 3Wigglesworth-3/11/1997
810 3Com, like a swimmer in the sea, is so tire and trying to catch anything he canP.M.Freedman-3/11/1997
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