<<We know that Dr J doesn't posture.>>
Yes, but unfortunately others seem to doubt this. I nearly ripped the magazine to shreds when I saw the current Business Week, for example. For those who don't subscribe, it features "The Info Tech 100," a list of the 100 companies supposedly best positioned to benefit from current and future IT trends. The selection method, of course, is a bizarre ad hoc jumble of revenues, recent stock performance, etc. etc., with apparently a heavy degree of subjective "tweaking" added as well by the editors based on their view of how well the company will do in the future. A number of our faves are on the list, natch, but (in addition to Intel) the most glaring omission is QCOM. Here are some positions on the list, and the rag's explanation of why QCOM was dropped this year:
1. Nokia
2. Siebel
3. Oracle
13. Network Appliance (see article from issue over on NTAP thread)
23. JDS-Uniphase
25. Cisco
26. EMC
29. Ericsson
44. i2
67. Citrix
75. Microsoft
76. Microsoft (just kidding)
103. Exodus
108. Kyocera
127. Lerner Hausie
____
Why They Fell off the List
Some of the most famous companies dropped out of the IT 100 this year. Here's what happened--and the prospects for these stars to shine again
...
QUALCOMM
Qualcomm Inc.'s (QCOM) bubble hasn't burst--it has exploded. Although the company's stock is up 284% for the year ended May 15, that's not what investors care about these days. Shareholders have seen Qualcomm's stock drop a sickening 65% since the beginning of the year. Much of the blame goes to Irwin M. Jacobs, co-founder and CEO of the wireless-technology pioneer. Qualcomm has excellent growth prospects. But Jacobs' often outlandish promotion led many to believe that Qualcomm would reap huge royalties because its technology would be used in all the world's cellular phones. That's looking like wishful thinking these days as competitors develop their own wireless technology.
tekboy/Ares@they'llsee,thebastards.com |
