I believe that we may discover that there is no "IP/Broadband" market sector, but several sub-sectors that will prove to be as large and contentious as what our concept of the IP/Broadband market will be. In other words, we may see more than one Gorilla and King in separate tornadoes spinning in sub-sectors of the IP/Broadband market.
Yes, I know. I think I stated that in the thread with this:
siliconinvestor.com
It's a given that the various subsectors of the overall name IP/Broadband will spawn numerous tornadoes. Some of those individual tornadoes will spawn a gorilla. That has never been in question for me. I grouped the entire space together because the 'average' of the tornado growth was 198% in the most recent quarter y/y. The entire space appears to be in the tornado. Now I see the cause for confusion and explain it below.
Just as the overall name "PC technology adoption life cycle" gave rise to subsectors with each having a gorilla or a royalty being spawned. Yet, we still call it the PC technology adoption life cycle which encompasses more than one subsector.
Likewise, there will be a name for the IP/Broadband cycle to describe the scope of voice and data. Maybe the name "Next Generation Network" will stick. Most seem to like it. Johnson has it well crafted on his site.
The three segments are:
• next generation of core Internet protocol-based services
• voice over IP, or Internet telephony
• data transport market
- access
- core
Within those three segments, there are some subsectors that are broken down into as well creating the opportunity for each subsector to spawn a leader.
When I read the the statement "there is room for success for many in this huge sector, but there will only be one Gorilla", UF is talking about the IP core subsector alone and he's right. This is a real game going on in that subsector all by itself of which Johnson and team feel this way about:
"In our opinion, Juniper is absolutely the leading Gorilla candidate in Next Generation Networks."
I obviously saw the word huge in UF's comment and equated it with the entire IP/Broadband space because of going back to the earlier portion of the thread when I posted the PSR's of many candidates and the response to Sham that the IP core game was only one game. So I jumped ahead to the entire IP/Broadband space once again and left the NGN core game behind when I posted Johnson's comments about Juniper in regards to the core space, but tossed in other comments from his interview in regards to the entire IP/Broadband space having the potential to "create more than one Cisco". My apologies for adding 'extra' comments rather than the entire interview. Certainly I'm not that far off and it explains the confusion that I created.
You can access the MindShare interview with PJ here:
robertsonstephens.com
Whether we look at the core transport optical subsector, the voice over IP segment, the IP infrastructure transport side, the IP edge, the IP core, the access market, scalable infrastructure or whatever - there will be several that end up owning their spaces. Whether or not more than one 'Cisco' is created or not, a lot of money is being made and is going to continue to be made in some of these subsectors.
BB |
