>I notice from this former post that you have a keen dislike for NN. Much of what
>you say is blatantly untrue leading me to question your motives.
'Keen dislike' is not how I would characterize it. I'm not as
emotional about it as that term would imply. FWIW, I was long NN
when the ATM products were schematics and specs through to about UB.
I was a believer (even went to the ATM Year 1 and 2 conferences).
Since then, though, I've mostly just been short due to management
ineptitude and market forces aligning against NN. I'm sure you
caught that from my earlier posts. So, having laid to rest my vile
motives, is the 36170 upgrade push (referred to in my initial note
as the reason for the 45% sequential growth) untrue?
>BTW, not all Cisco's acquisitions have been successful. Their two DSL purchases,
>for example, haven't given them a product that works.
Acquisitions aren't always about products.. sometimes they are about
assuring access to base technology, or buying talent, or preventing
competitors from getting at the technology/people, or revectoring
a like product into areas more in line with the major thrust of the
acquirer. Cisco is guilty of all of these (including acquiring
working product) and the bottom line is that they are king of the
hill and NN is not. Other than writedowns and layoffs, what has
NN got from its acquisitions. You know, only about three years
separates the two from their dates of inception, yet they chose
different paths in the greatest industry of our generation and
ended up in vastly different strata of valuation. Even you have
to admit that they both had the same chances at making it big in
this business and CSCO won, largely through relentless execution
and without the management missteps that plague NN on a recurring,
seemingly never-ending basis.
>Half truths do a disservice to us all and certainly do yourself
no credit.
So do selective truths. But then what makes your truth any better
than mine.
J. |
