Dear bgg - for discussion purposes, you argument is correct. An extrapolation on a small size can be misleading. So, BAY is still fighting an uphill battle. Also, you are right that CSCO is an awesome competitor. Regrettably, it is behaving more and more like the kid up in Washington St. Ok, some people don't see a problem with that, so a matter of viewpoint. Anyway, to give credit where credit's due, you are right that any challenger runs a great risk in the path of the Alpha Wolf. Anyone who disputes that is not honest to oneself!
Having said that, for discussion purposes, I certainly dispute some of the perceived [by you] weaknesses are not correct. While CSCO has a great sale force, BAY's service seems to be 1st class. Also, I think the contrast between Granite and Rapid City is relevant. BAY has demonstrated it can roll out its acquisitions' products quickly, ranging from Centillion and Rapid City to Netstation, this is indicative of its mgt skills and product-to-market efficency. Ok, to be fair, its sale force has not be able to overcome its "lesser wolf" status. Like it or not, this is what makes or breaks a co.
In term of Shared Media, it is a matter of whether BAY can survive the current transition. In that sense, we are both 1/2 right and 1/2 wrong. While BAY is not as deep a pocket as CSCO, it does have a pristine balance sheet. Personally, I am willing to be disappointed by BAY for a couple of Qs to see thru the transition. Alluded to my previous post, CSCO is very effective in maintaining its aging router revenues, so my hat off to Messr Chambers. However, it is quite an uneven view to think Shared Media is dying but to assume Router will survive the next bandwidth expansion.
So what is my conclusion. CSCO is a great co and safe investment; but BAY is a great class co but risky investment. With higher risk comes higher reward, with or without takeover <VBG>
rgds Bosco |
