Hi Bob, I finally tracked you down after seeing references to your post in several other places.
"Can I infer correctly that we are just as on track, according to Gilder's paradigm, as Chorum or Astarte Fiber Networks or Bookham? If so, I wonder why Gilder doesn't mention MRVC. If Frank Colluchio (sp?) is lurking, maybe he knows."
sp = Coluccio, BTW. Good try, though, and a lot better than most. -g-
Why doesn't Gilder take note of MRVC? Is that the question? I suppose that George has several criteria (like the folks over in the Gorilla thread do for determining if a company is a Gorilla, a King, or a Prince), for evaluating who is and who is not ascendant.
I hardly feel comfortable answering in his stead, but my take is that in order to meet his definition of being ascendant, a technology must be both unique, and it must show promise of engendering incremental innovations down the road where none would have otherwise taken place, as in any new branch of technology which spawns its own set of offshoots. Does that sound rational?
Where does MRV show such qualities? I'm not saying that in their many products they don't, it's just that I don't see it standing out anywhere. And that's not all bad, only that I cannot detect where MRV is doing something that no one else is. If they are, it's within reach of someone else's next release, and even MRV, itself, will be leapfrogging others, where they have fallen momentarily behind.
I understand that GG is away on lecture tour right now. I'd wait a few days and ask him directly when he returns. Most of the stocks that have excelled over the past several years obviously have not been on GG's list of ascendants. His asendants tend to be longer term statements of where he thinks technology is going, so the theory goes, anyway, and not about today's action or the merits of a given company's present product offerings. FWIW. Sorry I couldn't be of more help.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
