First let me say that "arguing" on this
thread is so much nicer than trying to deal
with some people on the Yahoo boards:)
I think our main difference is that you
place a great amount of emphesis on 3dfx
being very open about there plans and roadmap
so we, the investor, have enough information
to base our decisions on. I personally
agree with this to some extent but when I consider
whether managament is doing the right thing
as far as running the company goes this type
of silence does not bother me.
This is probably because one of my biggest pet
peaves is mangament running a company for the
sole perpose of raising the stock price (this one
will definitely get me in a lot of trouble
on an investment board:). I feel this leads
to decisions that ultimately destroy the company
(and the economy to a great extent).
The reason I like 3dfx management is because they
basically ignore the day to day price of the stock
in order to slowly build a great company (that
will eventually pay off for us investors). I guess
the part you don't like is that it takes some
amount of faith to know that this is true (i.e
we don't have all the facts).
When you say the mistakes have been short term in
nature and that we are really just talking semantic
differences I partly agree with you. But my real point
is that its not a mistake to try something and have it
fail if it doesn't hurt the long term growth of the
company and you learn from the "mistake". Filling
channels incorrectly is something you have to go
through (as you agreed to some extent) and also
they were never really in complete control until now.
To address some of your points
1)Saying that they are interested in set-top boxes is
giving us some clue as to their direction. Just
because we don't know about any deals is not a concern
to me at this time. If they are making deals now then
they are right on track.
2)I completely agree that if OEMs want certain features
then put them in anyway. My point is that if they get the
OEM wins anyway its not a problem. From reports (10 wins,
20 possibles, some tier 1 wins) it seems like they really
did build what the OEMs wanted, an inexpensive, high
quality part. Thats why I mentioned ATI, they have
thrived with the price advantage and good relationships
for years. Time will tell on this one.
3)As far as missing dates it all depends. At some point
the "management" made the decision and allocated the money
and resources to build the 2D part and Banshee. Was this
decision made soon enough? Were enough resources allocated?
These are management desisions and possible mistakes.
But, if some technology gliches occured that were beyond
"managements" control then we have to look at the
technical side of the company.
4)The troubles with DIMD and CREAF were going to happen
at some point. If they announced the STB merger later
what would have happened? Would they have made deals
with other board makers for V3? The time had come to
make a decision about V3, they decided to do it
themselves. EVERY DAY they delayed this decision or
announcent would mean a delay in V3 and 3dfx's
move into the future. I IN NO WAY feel that this was
a mistake of any kind. Did it cost them money, sure it
did but in the big picture it will reap much bigger
profits and the stock price will soar (IMHO). I feel
that if you look at the dollar amount it cost them
in a couple of years it will be hardly noticeable.
Why on earth would you risk the companies future
for a small savings now.
I do agree that as investor it is frustrating having to
guess. I guess it comes down to if you believe in the
management and trust them to do the right thing for
the company (even if they don't tell us). In seeing
3dfx management in actions and judging the decisions
we do know about I personally trust they are making
the right long term decisions.
Casey "I can't believe I went on this long" K
(Yes this is my alter ego) |
