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
USWeb (USWB)
An SI Board Since December 1997
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
1188 18 0 USWB
Emcee:  Labrador Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
913 You ignored my questions and asked questions. Please tell us how you missed tGeorge Dvorsky-5/17/1999
912 George, seeing the shorts in full panic mode gives me comfort that the short tegreenspirit-5/17/1999
911 Mark - Investment Banks do 2 things: 1) arrange corporate financing 2) merchRick-5/17/1999
910 Mary Meeker is not the analyst covering USWB, it is Michael Sherrick. Mary MeekMax O-5/17/1999
909 Rick, I just don't get it. While I see the logic to some of your argumentsMarkC-5/17/1999
908 Mary Meeker at MStanley is considered the most credible Internet stocks analystRacso-5/17/1999
907 Mary Meeker of Morgan Stanley just initiated coverage of USWB with an "OuRacso-5/17/1999
906 George - you are certainly not letting the facts get in the way of a good stoRick-5/17/1999
905 Rick, While you're explaining things, why have you chosen to show up on thGeorge Dvorsky-5/16/1999
904 Greg - If my previous response did not satisfy your need for clarity, and youRick-5/16/1999
903 Greg - since you seem confused about whether i am taking a solid position on Rick-5/16/1999
902 ok. let's try to get things back on track here, and invite people that havRick-5/16/1999
901 You'll never be wrong being on both sides of the fence. You should be an anGregory Seward-5/16/1999
900 You wrote: << Genious? ....>> <<..clique>> Du eye reeRick-5/16/1999
899 Sorry Rick, that simplistic argumentative style won't cut it. It's as tgreenspirit-5/15/1999
898 Michael - I guess your general point is that you are genius for getting in atRick-5/15/1999
897 Mark - all other things equal, I think USWB's action on Friday is a good Rick-5/15/1999
896 Rick, res- << But my guess is that most USWB investors haven't clue 1greenspirit-5/14/1999
895 Rick, What do you make of USWB's stability in todays down market? Do you tMarkC-5/14/1999
894 Brett - The reason 3% is bad is because there are alternative investments whiRick-5/14/1999
893 I agree. The connotation of his query is that it's "you" (short)SJS-5/14/1999
892 I was just curious if you got burned on your last short. However, I agree that Gregory Seward-5/14/1999
891 Actually, from two sources only, Reuters Business News had two releases, one onRealMuLan-5/14/1999
890 But this stock does looks strong in this kind of environment. About the shorts,RealMuLan-5/14/1999
889 <<This, I think, is the third time this has been posted in the last two dRealMuLan-5/14/1999
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