Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Vitesse Semiconductor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Trader Dave who wrote (2696)	7/12/1999 4:25:00 PM
From: SJS	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4710

Update: [VTSS] REPEAT: VITESSE SEMICONDUCTOR Q3 NET 24 CENTS VS. NET 18 CENTS YR. AGO.

To: Trader Dave who wrote (2696)	7/13/1999 12:12:00 AM
From: Beltropolis Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4710

>Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn................. another typical vtss quarter. let's see what they say about the contract manufacturer situation.< TD. forgive me, cuz i've yet to tap into the CC (sleepy me-self), but i'm curious if anyone might've broached the topic of receivables? up 35% sequentially. (you know, i saw the after-hours dip and thought something must be amiss -- the ol' pre-announcement run-up and post- earnings sell-off is surely passé.) might LU be having a small cash flow problem ... dipping into the pension till? ha ha. or perhaps it's just new contractor growing pains? not having silly withdrawals just wondering if you've got the straight dope, -chris. Sequential Qtr FY A/R Increase Q3 99 $64,992 35.1% Q2 99 $48,124 6.8% Q1 99 $45,080 13.4% Q4 98 $39,749 14.5% Q3 98 $34,725 -

To: Trader Dave who wrote (2696)	7/22/1999 11:31:00 AM
From: Beltropolis Boy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4710

>another typical vtss quarter. let's see what they say about the contract manufacturer situation.< TD, BD, et al. granted, the street is myopic and overly focuses on the here and now, but donning my sorta rose-colored glasses for a moment, couldn't one make a legit argument that LU's third-party outsourcing is a result of their nervousness over capacity constraints? so, long-term, this could actually benefit vitesse? and go a long way toward reducing the weight of the 20% revenue gorilla on their back? do you attribute DSOs nudging to 71 from 64, days inventory creeping up to 74 from 70, and receivables spiking 35% all part of the LU transition? thanks, -chris.