or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by UIGuy

A large horde of cash makes you a target. Regardless. If you look at the numbers, there isn't much they could afford yesterday that they can't afford now. Remember, that is 45B over 3 years. Just above spitting in the pond. The officers do have an obligation to the shareholders, and if there is nothing in 'THAT' price range, returning some value to investors comes off as looking pretty responsible (yes, I know all about the MSFT dividends discussion - we'll see...
I am confused here. In my view of product development - if you build a superior product / support a superior experience, you get to charge a superior price. If you make superior profits, good for you. If, on the other hand, your product is virtually indistinguishable from 10 others on the market, well then, your per product margins are likely to be lower. If you can't turn a nice profit, I don't care how many of them you sell. If you can turn a nice profit and you...
Actually, there is some good evidence that they do. Providing that quantity of content required by instant and continuous news means the village idiot, once ignored, is now all of a sudden 'interesting'.
I am not one to believe any of this venture capital valuation voodoo... Keepin' it real: 1. What IP do they own? 2. What are their revenue prospects? It takes a lot of revenue to make your company really worth 4B dollars. Or at least it should. Playing with mirrors in the fun house can make the thinnest company look fat. So, yeah, I would of sold. And gone on to make something else.
Tooling for a case is several orders of magnitude cheaper than tooling for the case itself... Plus it gives Apple endorsed ( taxed) cases a leg up... For about 2 weeks... It would, however, be sheer genius if Apple were actually behind all the leaks. Leaking this here and that there... And then finding out who could keep a secret and who couldn't. Kind of like using dye to find where the leak occurred...
While this may work for male executives, I would never, ever, ever try this with a female executive - too high a chance that it would be considered / construed as condescending - regardless of how it was intended. Nope, just 'fired'.
Not sure what is more disturbing... Having a CEO who had to be fired by phone - or having a Chairman that didn't know to contact HR/IT and have her network privileges revoked first... But seriously, Yahoo has great potential. I liken them to a pile of Legos sitting in the corner - a great opportunity... But most people will just build something that nobody else recognizes. They need to regroup. Get rid of the clown pants interface. And make me want to use...
Markets don't like uncertainty. Steve retired, uncertainty was reduced. But it was a partial retirement, so he's still kind of there - so there is no vacuum. Further, the uncertainty about Apple's eventual succession plan was reduced.
Perhaps. But 'some' don't understand the rules of the game as it is being played out... Baseball is baseball - in one division the pitchers bat and in another you have designated hitters. Hardly a double standard.
Why buy the milk when the cow is cheaper?Sounds like the sum of the pieces is worth well more than the current configuration of the whole. Anyone want to reconsider that "offer" from Carl Icahn? http://www.forbes.com/2003/11/07/cx_pp_1107kodak.html
New Posts  All Forums: