All:
Sorry here folks, but I have to vent a little bit, because I see all this chatter about LU and CSCO and COMS and they are all being lumped together as being "in the same industry". First of all, it's not just this thread, it's the analysts too; that said "HELLO IS ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION!".
The "carrier equipment" manufacturer is dead/dying. The IP companies are going to take their place in 5 years. Last I checked this was companies like COMS and CSCO, not LU and NT etal.
Whatever happens to these companies has NOTHING to do with CSCO and COMS. COMS and CSCO are taking share from these big companies, that's why their earnings are hurting. In addition COMS and all the smaller players are taking share from CSCO.
There really are 4 tiers here:
(1) LU, NT, etal
(2) CSCO
(3) COMS
(4) FORE, ASND, etal
Tier 1 is dying. Tier 2 is bleeding badly from the "death of a thousand cuts". COMS is just big enough that it is a REAL contender in just about every single market on the face of the earth. Tier 4 makes great "filler" equipment when you use (1) & (2).
The whole point of this is that comparing COMS to ANY OTHER COMPANY is pointless. COMS is a completely different ball game. COMS has a number of things other companies don't have. COMS has the Palm Computing stuff, which the way it is going will be a couple of B$ a year VERY soon. COMS has solid client AND server end equipment for xDSL, Cable and analog. COMS has NICs. COMS has the BEST layer 3 technology and a solid knowledge with IP.
CSCO is marketing products for a dying market (as Schroder (sp?)) mentioned. Who wants a frigging router that can route 9 or 10 protocols. Everyone and their uncle is switching (pardon the pun) to IP leaving CSCO out in an expensive cold wilderness.
So the point is, STOP COMPARING COMS to everyone that makes any kind of "information technology" companies, cause it just doesn't work.
Steve |
