> CSCO is way overpriced compared to Lucent.
CSCO P/E: 117 LU P/E: 82.6... Not 'way' overpriced. Both are overpriced, but the difference between 117 and 82.6 is not much, in my opinion.
> Lucent is much bigger and in the same business
Hmm... Lucent IS much bigger (employee and sales-wise), but their divisions that are in the same business as CSCO are not bigger. Remember, you have to discount their microelectronics business, their fiber-optic cable business, etc... when comparing the two.
> LU does have enormous R&D arm which csco does not have.
Really? Let's see, would you rather have Bell Labs, or Silicon Valley? Silicon Valley is really CSCO's R&D department. In case you haven't noticed, they fund companies here, they buy companies here, and they hire lots of engineers from here.
> LU probably has more PhDs than all of CSCO engs.
A worthless argument. Even if it wore true, it proves nothing. I've learned far more working in industry than I ever could have getting a PhD. In engineering, a PhD doesn't mean as much as it does in other fields... No offense to any engineers with PhD's, but it really is only a piece of paper meant to impress people like you, Jach.
> With ASND in their pocket, LU has what CSCO has and much much more.
Well, we'll see about that in a year's time, now, won't we?
JC |
