1- CSCO, LU and NT, by far the three largest communications equipment providers, are preaching Gigabit and even terabit routers as replacements in Service Provider's cores. A paradigm shift in the making that COULD hurt Newbridge very dearly.
There's a big difference between preaching and providing. Which is it? (Please provide URLs as I don't know where CSCO, LU, and NT stand on their ATM products.)
Are their products 1) further ahead in development? 2) superior? 3) priced more competitively?
2- NN's lowsy record of making their numbers the last 3 quarters.
Looking backwards can be as effective as driving with your eye on the rearview mirror.
3- NN's lack of a layer 3 story after the UB fiasco.
Check out the following links:
newbridge.com
newbridge.com
newbridge.com
Herndon, Virginia, March 17, 1998 - Newbridge Networks today announced that its switched routing system was judged the most cost effective among the Layer 3 switching solutions evaluated by Renaissance Worldwide Inc., a leading information technology consultant. The Newbridger switched routing solution frees network managers to spend less time "fighting fires" and more time focusing on existing and emerging end-user requirements. The industry's only Multiprotocol-over-ATM (MPOA)-based solution, the Newbridge system was shown to deliver cost reductions of nearly twice that offered by traditional and non-standard-compliant networks.
newbridge.com
I'm no engineer, but how is it possible to win awards on your Layer 3 technology and not have products? What am I missing?
4- NN's relatively small size, compared to the afore-mentioned networking giants.
Not sure how this reflects on Mr. Crocket's comment. As I see it, being a relatively small ATM company makes NN an easier buyout candidate should one of the integrators come knocking. And I do agree with those who say the small networkers will need to merge. At this stage, however, the players are just beginning to line up.
IMHO, as a Canadian investment firm, they were quite gutsy to make the statements they made and dare I say, not that far off the mark. (At the risk of being flamed by this thread ...)
The investment firm made two comments: 1) that NN was pricey and 2) that their market might move away from them.
Could you please tell me how either is correct and in your words, "not far off the mark." I admire gutsy comments when they're accurate. When they're not, there are other adjectives that come to mind.
Regards,
Pat
|
