Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO)

CSCO 76.22

+0.1%

Nov 24 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Thomas M. who wrote (27775)	8/19/1999 3:33:00 PM
From: JRH	Read Replies (3) of 77400

Makes sense, since faulty CSCO gear was the problem And it wasn't Lucent's gear that broke down? I remember hearing plenty of rumors during the AT&T failure that it was also an operator error that caused the collapse of the network. But those rumors never grew because CSCO immediately took the blame for it, even if it wasn't their fault (and it might have been, I don't know). I think that that would have been the honorable thing for LU to do as well, even if it was WCOM's fault. Even if they didn't come out and take the blame, they shouldn't have played "it's not our fault". Making the customer look bad just doesn't seem to be a smart thing to do, especially for such a huge customer. All the facts leaking out of the MCI outage point to WCOM's incompetence Not according to Mr. Ebbers. I am not trying to play the Cisco cheerleader game, as I hold both companies. I just think that Cisco handled it better. But, you are entitled to your own opinion. Just don't assume that I am prejudiced against LU because I am posting on this thread. Justin Happily long LU & CSCO

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next