Disagrees with Gary = inaccurate = not worth reading
Gary, I am sorry that it is so galling to you that I do not agree with many of the "facts" that you have posted. I do not know exactly what job position you are in at Cisco, but unless you are Larry Carter posting under a pseudonym, I am not inclined to take your comments as fact. I have had too many conversations with too many Cisco employees at too many levels of your again admittedly outstanding company where gross mistruths and technology urban legends are stated as fact to simply accept the gospel according to Gary.
It is scary that you would not want to read alternative perspectives. I will admit to the inaccuracy of the address of headquarters, I didn't have it at home. However, the numbers I quote come from published sources painstakingly scrubbed and cross checked against each other and against numbers provided by Cisco. BTW did you know if you add up all of the product numbers provided to dataquest, IDC and others, you get a revenue figure 22% higher than Cisco's audited numbers. It varies from quarter to quarter, but it is always more than 20% too high. If you are using these same numbers internally, perhaps that is why you constantly seem to think my calculations are biased against Cisco. Believe me, I just want to get to the truth so that I can draw a better bead on just what the next few quarters are going to look like. I am getting a little skittish because my analysis leads me to believe Cisco is still tightly tied to the enterprise market and I believe that that market is going to slightly decelerate in 1999 and I believe that Cisco will not be able to gain enough additional market share to make up for it.
If Cisco is the leader in remote access concentrators - who are the carrier customers and how many ports have they deployed?
If Cisco sold more stratacom gear than all of Ascend's revenues who were the carrier customers beyond T, WorldCom and BT? - And why doesn't Cisco report this extra stratacom revenue to any data publisher?
The only reason I post here, is because it really bugs me when people post facts with out backing them up. I get all of the sell side reports - I won't quote them because it's not my call to do so - and I buy all of the raw data sources. I do as much do dilligence as is possible - it is my full time job. I don't care if you don't think my opinion is credible, but since I am only trying to help people it does bother me that you continue to try to discredit my posts. Post your alternative scenario without the snide comments, cite numbers and facts, tell us how you got them so we can judge whether or not they might be biased, and let the people decide. |
