Tiger Growls Back

The most recent Business Week fiction regarding Tiger Management was its assertions that the company was ''literally forced out of business'' because of liquidity issues at the Jaguar Fund and also that Tiger had commingled assets among its funds (''What really killed Tiger,'' Finance, Apr. 17).

In fact, Tiger made its decision to liquidate its funds in mid-February and commenced market activities to that end well before investors notified Jaguar of requests for Mar. 31 redemptions. Tiger's desire to treat all of the investors in its six funds equitably led to a suspension of redemptions not just in Jaguar but also in Tiger and other funds having quarterly withdrawal rights.

The first-quarter withdrawals in the Jaguar Fund would have reduced its outstanding shares below the threshold set by Antilles law. If Tiger wished to continue its investment operations, however, Jaguar's Board could have fixed the problem, as it did in September, 1999, by declaring a stock dividend. This quick and easy procedure would have averted the legal impediment cited in your story. Jaguar's liquidity, contrary to your thesis, was never a factor.

Contrary to what you state, commingling of assets among Tiger's investment funds has never occurred. Ever since its inception, Tiger has utilized a common investment strategy to manage its various funds. Each fund holds separate and identifiable positions in nearly identical portfolios of securities. Spelled out in the offering circulars and Tiger's regulatory filings, that practice is--and was--well known to all of our investors.

All of this information was explained to your reporter prior to publication of his article, but he obviously decided to ignore it.

William R. Goodell
General Counsel
Tiger Management LLC
New York

Editor's note: Business Week stands by the story. A Tiger spokesman interviewed for the story told Business Week that the decision to shut the funds was made in late February, after requests for redemptions had begun pouring in. Redemptions were so huge by the end of March that Jaguar investors were told that they were legally precluded from withdrawing their money from the fund. If there was a ''quick and easy'' way to allow withdrawals, as Goodell says, that is contrary to the clear language of the notice to Jaguar investors.

Business Week did not ''assert'' that commingling had taken place. We reported this as one of the issues raised by an Ocelot Fund investor. Our primary point--that Ocelot shareholders were disadvantaged by withdrawals in other funds--was substantiated by the letter from Julian Robertson reprinted in the article. Tiger's response to all these matters was quoted in the article.

At Least Biotech Foods Haven't Been Sprayed

I'm bewildered by the uproar about genetically engineered (or biotech) foods (''Biotech foods aren't out of the woods yet,'' News: Analysis & Commentary, Apr. 17). Granted we should be wary of ingested substances, yet when hysteria comes before concern or even education, we should take these protests with a grain of salt. There are far more genuine health concerns to be found in foods right under our noses, such as fast foods, which are dangerously high in cholesterol and fat.

Genetically engineered foods are usually safer and more efficient than their ''natural'' counterparts. Your garden-variety corn plant will need to be sprayed more than 40 times a season to deter pests, whereas a genetically engineered corn plant will not. Weren't these protesters the same ones who were protesting spraying plants with such substances only a decade ago?

Kamela Evans
San Diego

Please, No Special Rules for Tech Patents

The present legal standards for patentability are technology-neutral and should remain so (''Those Web patents aren't advancing the ball,'' News: Analysis & Commentary, Apr. 17). Culling out particular technologies for special scrutiny under the patent law is a formula for disaster: Every technology group from biotech to software will clamor for exceptions or limitations to the well-established law because their particular field of innovation is ''different'' or ''special.''

Joseph T. Leone
DeWitt Ross & Stevens
Madison, Wis.

Gazing into the NBA's Future

In ''Why the NBA can't find the hoop'' (Sports Business, Apr. 10), the conclusion that ''the odds of the National Basketball Assn. recovering its lost allure anytime soon are remote at best'' is certain to prove as accurate as its statement that Michael Jordan has only five championship rings.

Howard M. Pearl
General Counsel
National Basketball Referees Assn.
Santa Monica, Calif.

Editor's note: The story should have said that Michael Jordan has six championship rings.

Cash Flow Is the Most Telling Indicator

''Techdom's new bean-counting battle'' (News: Analysis & Commentary, Apr. 17) was interesting, but the ruling [against ''pooling of interests''] won't have a major impact on my or any other astute market participant's investment decisions. I have almost always ignored reported earnings per share in reviewing a tech company's progress, while keeping a keen eye on its operating cash-flow growth. This financial statement report is much more difficult to ''manage'' than earnings and therefore gives an investor a better picture of the underlying business.

I am a firm believer that the cash-flow statement gives the best indicator of a company's future--no ability to generate cash usually equals a grim future.

D. Anthony Scaglione
Belleville, N.J.

The Real Microsoft Issue Is Windows' Dominance

I've just read ''Why Gates is rolling the dice'' (Cover Story, Apr. 17), and you attach too much significance to the browser war with Netscape Communications Corp. Microsoft Corp.'s attempt to dominate the Web-browser market was a mere stalking-horse on the part of the Justice Dept. Microsoft's Internet Explorer captured market share from Netscape Navigator not because it was 'bundled' with Windows 95 but because it was clearly a superior browser. Similarly, Microsoft's True Types fonts supplanted Adobe Systems Inc.'s proportional fonts not because they were part of Windows 3.1 but because they were far cheaper than Adobe's overpriced product.

Surely, the central case against Microsoft is not the bundling of application software with its operating system, but rather the monopolistic control of this operating system and attendant abuses that have arisen from this. In any high-productivity environment, Windows is a disaster. (As an audio-video programmer, I push the system to its limits, which means rebooting five or six times a day.) What is more, we have been double- and triple-billed for this system in the form of version upgrades, which have only been marginal improvements over earlier releases. In any other industry, this would constitute a clear-cut case of product liability and the cause for a class action suit.

William B. Fankboner
La Quinta, Calif.

Even with School Vouchers, Rich Kids Would Have the Edge

I find it disconcerting to read about an educational issue that is used as a pawn by the Presidential candidates (''The ABC's of vouchers and politics,'' Government, Apr. 10). While I can see the benefits of allowing vouchers, I can see the drawbacks as well. Even though our children would have the opportunity to attend the school of their choice, acceptance would not be guaranteed. One has to take into account the preliminary qualifications of passing entrance exams. You would end up with some parents who could afford to pay for tutoring services to aid in their child's testing ability, leaving a vast majority of less wealthy families without this option.

Lisa Scotti
Elk Grove, Calif.

Ticketmaster Hasn't Mastered Online Sales

Why devote almost two pages to Ticketmaster's online ticket-sales capability when its system can't handle the demand for major acts, like the recently announced 'N Sync tour (''A ticket to dot-com heaven?'' Information Technology, Apr. 10)? I set up an Express Ordering account with Ticketmaster the night before the tickets went on sale. Within 10 minutes, I was able to get to the order screen, where I specified quantities, shipping method, etc. But the system was so overloaded it never showed me the seats I could buy. It kept saying to try again. This went on for almost an hour. I then tried by phone for another hour, only to hear constant busy signals.

I bet 98% of the seats for this concert, which sold out in about an hour, were purchased by people standing in line. Now, my only option is to buy tickets for my three daughters from a ticket broker in Kansas--where scalping is legal.

Robert H. Silvy
Kansas City, Mo.

One Way to Spark More Utility Competition

''Online utilities charge up'' (Industrial Management, Apr. 17) provided an objective view of the enormous potential that deregulation and e-commerce offer the energy-purchasing public. Consumers in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors have a unique opportunity to leverage these two industry trends to lower their costs and obtain a greater level of customer service.

Unfortunately, studies conducted by Datamonitor show that less than a third of all consumers are aware of energy deregulation and less than 10% are willing to switch suppliers. In order to implement and deliver true retail choice to electricity consumers, greater ''shopping credits'' (the value assigned to the electricity component of traditional electric service) must be given by each state's public utility commission. A higher shopping credit would ensure a margin sufficient to attract and promote competition from various nontraditional electricity suppliers. Only then will all consumers reap the true benefits of electric deregulation.

Alan M. Herbst
Tim Douek
Datamonitor Inc.
New York

How a New Law Would Foster Income Equity

I wish to clarify a description of the Income Equity Act, included in ''Executive Pay'' (Special Report, Apr. 17). Under current tax law, companies may deduct a ''reasonable allowance for salaries or other compensation.'' This deduction is capped at $1 million, but the law contains no other definition of what is reasonable.

The Income Equity Act would redefine ''a reasonable allowance'' by capping--not eliminating, as the article states--the tax deductibility of executive compensation at 25 times the salary of the lowest-paid full-time employee. This would link the salaries of top earners with those at the bottom, and ensure that the federal government--and U.S. taxpayers--don't subsidize excessive wage gaps.

Martin Olav Sabo (D-Minn.)
House of Representatives
Washington

''Minding your money with the Web's help'' (Hers, May 1, 2000)

''Minding your money with the Web's help'' (Hers, May 1, in the magazine) provided incorrect Web addresses for the money areas of oxygen.com and womenconnect.com. The correct addresses, respectively, are www.ka-ching.com and www.womenconnect.com/yourmoney.