INPR - Inprise to Borland (BORL) 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 : INPR - Inprise to Borland (BORL)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bradley W. Price who wrote (4182)	1/28/2000 11:54:00 PM
From: Maher Sid-Ahmed	Read Replies (2) of 5102

Can anyone explain why revenue growth for the last two years have been negative? Prior to the purchase of Visigenic their revenues exceeded ~$50 million per quarter. Visigenics had revenues of ~$7 million per quarter (this is from memory and my figures could be inaccurate but not far off.) The combined companies with now double the number shares (48 million after combining the two companies and now 62 million at last count) have a combined income of less than $50 million. The original Borland had 24 million shares and higher revenues. In the last quarter they signed a deal with Cisco, produced new products and yet revenues are down. Either this company has one of the worst contract negotiating team in Silicon Valley or a very poor marketing and sales department. The number of shares have increased by ~4 million from the previous quarter where did this increase come from? The previous CEO had a share buy back program - this should mean that total number of shares should have dropped below 48 million instead we see an increase in the number of shares. The most recent quarter announcement left alot of unanswered questions. On a positive note the CEO projected a return to profitabilty by the second half of this year. That could also be interpreted that he is not too confident about the present quarter. I am still unable to comprehend how sales will increase by giving development tools for free to Linux developers, unless he hopes to make this up in future consulting and contract work. I am unable to comprehend how can BEAS have much higher revenue growth and INPR negative revenue growth. Are they not in the same enterprise business with INPR having "World class" development tools that BEAS does not have. This company has to have a serious look at its marketing, sales and contract negotiating teams. Its performance is poor even when compared to the old Borland, yet what we have today is a much better company with world class technical staff, but very poor execution by the sales group. It is unclear how the spin off of the data base group will increase shareholders value. Especially that INPR will finance the company with $50 million. This will leave INPR with $50 million less and in return get a 20% stake in the new company. Maybe a good idea - maybe not. Their investment will pan out if the new company has a capitalization greater than $250 million. INPR has a capitalization of ~$700 million with much more to offer than their proposed spin off. I am long on INPR but just weary of their execution, their proposals and recent quarter results. Maher

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next