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 : Lucent Technologies (LU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Phoenix who wrote (8954)	7/31/1999 1:11:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21876

Is LU really that inefficient? They sure are. In a previous post I pointed out that over the last 9 months LU was in a negative operating cash flow position, and only turned positive this quarter. That speaks to an inefficient operation, which, if turned around, will free up considerable capital. Mr. Fun, in properly criticizing my faulty analysis, pointed out that LU's operating cash flow was in the neighborhood of $170MM, which is considerably less than it's reported earnings. Ordinarily, this kind of disparity is a red flag. However, I believe that LU is committed to improving its operations, and that will result in freeing up considerable capital that could be used for productive purposes. For the 9 month period LU had operating earnings of $4.54 BB (excluding one-time charges); in Sept 1998 it had non-current liabilities of 10.77 BB, debt maturing in one year of $2.23BB and equity of $7.71 BB. If you define ROIC as the ratio of earnings to the sum of equity and non-current liabilities and debt maturing in one year you get 4.54/(10.77 + 7.71 + 2.23) = 21.9%, and annualizing that figure you get an ROIC of 30.25%. That's not too shabby a number, but suppose that through more efficient operations inventories and accounts receivable could be shaved by an aggregate of $2BB the ROIC could be increased to nearly 34%. The aggregate amount of A/R, inventories and contracts in process totaled about 11.94 BB in September. The total was about $16 BB last quarter. The aggregate increase was 33.9% which is greater than the 19.4% increase in revenues yoy for the nine month period. This suggests that there is considerable room for improvement. The argument that top line growth is most important is true, but only when taken in the context of the overall operation. If operations are sucking up cash due to inefficiencies it constrains top line growth because it limits the ability of the company to expand (without recourse to additional debt or equity). I am certain the LU's management is well aware of these issues. They almost bring to mind the turn-around that IBM was able to engineer. If you recall, at the beginning the argument was made that IBM was achieving its improvements by cutting expenses and there was a limit to what could be done. But the fact was that by cutting unnecessary expenses and creating a more efficient operation IBM was able to reinvigorate top line growth. TTFN, CTC

To: The Phoenix who wrote (8954)	8/10/1999 6:01:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21876

>>These guys know their stuff. Well, they must be keeping it to themselves. One doesn't know how to compute PEG and the other thinks bonds are rated in a vacuum. >>I never really considered this before. Is LU really that inefficient? What areas are they cutting to reduce costs? Clearly the easiest and quickest way to improve earnings is to cut costs but there's been literally no talk of this anywhere I can find. You've peaked my interest but I'd like to see some data. That's a given. DLJ published a report comparing the two and they stated Cisco was the superior company primarily because of its faster top line growth, culture, management and positioning. LU was expected to do well with the bottom line because it was comparatively inefficient and would be able to cut costs in the short term to pad the same. The bottom line of the DLJ report was that only MSFT was in the same league as Cisco.