Concerns about revenue is always valid, but should there be concerns
here at all with Bay?
Take a look at these comparisons of BAY, COMS, CSCO latest 3Qs:
Quarter Quarter Quarter
------- ------- -------
BAY: Q3'97(Mar) Q4'97 Q1'98
$513mil $543 $601
->5.8%-> ->10.7%->
CSCO: Q3'97(April) Q4'97 Q1'98
$1.648bil $1.765 $1.869
->7.1%-> ->5.9% ->
COMS: Q3'97(Feb) Q4'97 Q1'98
$1.426bil $1.506 $1.6
->5.6%-> ->6.2% ->
COMS latest quarter to be announced this week is going to be much
lower, so COMS growth rate will come down substantially.
Pick for yourself, which of the 3 have the strongest revenue growth
showing lately? Cisco is slowing in front of everyone's eyes and yet
they do not see.
Some scenarios:
If Bay could maintain 11% sequential growth, that would translate to
52% yearly growth rate.
If Bay could do 8% this Q2'98 and 8% for Q3'98, that would be 36%
yearly growth rate compared to Q3'97.
____________
Sure doesn't feel like revenue should be a concern to me especially
management having stated again and again that there's going to be
revenue growth for the quarter. One can't expect a big company to do
11% sequential every quarter because that's 52% yearly growth rate.
Anyhow, enough rambling. Poor me. Poor everyone. The stock has been
terribly manipulated. It is not fair for Bay to be scrutinized like
this. Certainly, any company, if scrutinized closely enough, will
have faults. For instance, Cisco sequential growth went from 7.1%
down to 5.9% - should this not be something to raise some eyebrows?
ptv |
