Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 21 Jan 1996 14:55:02 -0800 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Denys writes:
> In a message dated 96-01-19 21:34:20 EST, [log in to unmask] (Phil Smith) writes:
>
> >Perhaps the match might have a detrimental effect on Apple; then again, it
> >might have a positive effect on HP. Both firms were started by two guys in
> >a garage - the difference is that you have to dig deep to uncover that in
> >HP. Wouldn't it be wonderful to find HP evangelizing the 3000?
>
> Wrong,
>
> The folks who started HP stayed with HP for good. The folks who started
> Apple left or were forced out. Apple then lost its CORE beliefs! Now it
^^^^^^ (just wondering what Ed McCracken woyuld say :)
As did HP, as shown by examing the corporate goals now vs. at the start,
and in the often commented-on demise of the "HP way". (In 9/1983 "Hewlett-
Packard Statement of Corporate Objectives", Profit moved to #1,
Customers dropped from #1 to #2.)
> stuck with Spindler who is supported by a Chairman who shows is support by
> selling 1 million shares of Apple stock!
I suspect George Carter would be able to amply comment on the sales of stock
by high level HP managers, particularly Lew Platt. :)
..not siding with either side of the above, just balancing the statements.
--
Stan Sieler [log in to unmask]
http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html
|
|
|