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 : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (28185)	9/20/1999 12:03:00 PM
From: PJ Strifas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

Hello Fredrick, It's true that there still is a mindset within Novell which doesn't see the forest for the trees (or vice versa) but I'm not at all sure that the success/failure of NT/NetWare can correlate into this new era we are in. <<Novell can't quid pro quo NDS like they tried to do with Netware. The Netware vs. NT battle was lost in the field of application development. Novell just made it too damn hard for companies to develop to their APIs. Microsoft, on the other hand, made it very easy for companies to develop to their APIs. And remember, in the beginning NT really stood for "nothing there" yet Microsoft schmoozed app developers with their commitment to "open up.">> This same approach which so won over developers is also showing signs of wear and tear. Over the last few years, developers have been jumping off the proprietary bandwagon known as Win32 for the openness and freedom of web-based technologies. There are several reasons for this: 1) There's more growth in the web than Win32 platform. 2) Cross-platform compatibility and convergence will drive software sales beyond the PC era. 3) The Palm phenomenon is just the tip of the iceberg, devices will shrink, functionality will grow (if only we had another space race to accelerate this) people will get connected from varying devices. 4) "Webtone" will be a reality sooner rather than later. Microsoft has also shown a propensity for allowing developers to create products and more importantly markets only to release a similar component within their OS (for free) and steal much thunder from the originator(s). Also the very thing that made Microsoft's platform so easy to develop for is showing problems with quality assurance, compatibility (even between MSFT products), security and performance. The Second Wave of the internet is going to demand more from an operating system than we currently see and understand. In what ways I'm not exactly sure but I would guess that performance and accessibility will be tops on the list with security an ever present factor. Microsoft only hopes to mirror their dominance in desktops in dominance in the browser (and webserver) market. In this way, they hope to "own" the end-user experience which will inevitably grant them much power. Their continued success will hinge on their ability to translate the desktop market into a "webtop" market (IMHO). The problem with that strategy is the "plumbing" aspect. We know the limitation of their products to provide the framework necessary to sustain a "Microsoft-only" solution from content source to end-user client requests that will negate any other product or even a "best-of-breed" solution. It's true that not even Novell can hope for that much but when you look at the solution from a best-of-breed perspective, Novell offers a great deal of the plumbing (or framework) to make much of Mr. Gates vision a reality here and now...... (IMHO). Peter J Strifas

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (28185)	9/21/1999 9:02:00 AM
From: Spartex	Respond to of 42771

NOVL Issues IMHO-- NEGATIVES: weak stock technicals; VP/Mktg & overall mktg issues; insider sales(Chris Stone); Y2K; W2K; possible buyout manipulation of stock POSITIVES: Schmidt's direct upbeat comments in interview; frequent press releases detailing many exciting new products/partnerships; most exciting...pending DigitalMe release; stock buyback plan #2; two years of consistently improving financial performance; potential breakout 4th Qtr.

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (28185)	9/21/1999 9:12:00 AM
From: Spartex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

I have experienced three portfolio buyouts this year, FORE,VLSI, And DGN, all of which had the following similarities for several months prior to deal announcement: >frequent company press releases/interviews confirming improving operations, as well as exciting new products, partnerships and market opportunities. >strange weakening of stock price...counter to improving company fundamentals. high frequency of negative messages on Yahoo, primarily from new posters, containing no facts or rational discussion, and obviously trying to provoke fear. These unusual similarities, for each of the stocks mentioned above, suggest that the acquirers could have orchestrated the weaker stock prices through special market strategies executed by their merger/acquisition "hired guns"...for many months prior to revealing their buyout deal. The weakened stock price improves appeal of the buyout price; management gets pressured to support the "attractive" deal; frustrated shareholders are relieved to accept the offer, after seeing their stock beaten up for several months. This can be happening to NOVL behind the scenes, at this moment...especially if Schmidt and the Board have been spurning overtures from a potential acquirer who may now have turned hostile. Already, I've read the posting of one NOVL shareholder who said that he would now be willing to accept a $28 buyout, after experiencing a $10 drop from $31 level in just two months. (Could the sharp rise then drop of the stock reflect the workings of a "hired gun" for the hostile acquirer?) While some are starting to give up on NOVL, I'm staying focused on NOVL's strongly improving fundamentals, and will not let this strange price action get to me. Over the next few years, as NOVL accelerates its growth strategy, I expect to see NOVL's stock price rise to a price level far beyond any acquirer's price today....just the personal opinion of a CNL (certified Novell Long)

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (28185)	9/21/1999 2:24:00 PM
From: ToySoldier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

OK - now that my personal stars are re-aligning as of today, I have had a chance to read my post on the "Consumer vs Vendor" post. I failed to mention a critical component of my opinions which makes my comments sound a bit too negative (i.e. the term of "war" and "Battle"). The ability and desire of the vendors to gather as much knowledge about us as consumers and our buying habits is not all a bad thing. If confronted with the question, most consumers would say that they would prefer a means of executing a transaction with a vendor that would leave no traces of their transaction in the Vendor's knowledgebase. In other words, they would rather that Vendors would not track, trace, and extract information from the consumer. The main two reasons for this general attitude is: 1) the consumer feels that another "big brother" is watching and that gives them a feeling of privacy invasion. 2) the majority of consumers have been "burned" by the results of this information being gathered - i.e. being put on a marketed consumer info database and receiving annoying marketing assaults from other vendors. These are valid reasons, BUT, one should not throw out the baby with the wash-water because there are also some extremely valuable benefits from the Vendors efforts to gather information about you as a consumer. Think of some of the benefits: 1) The more a vendor knows about you as a customer, the more the vendor can evolve its products and services to better meet your needs. By gathering, analyzing, and responding to its customers' habits, the vendor can identify products/services that are not of value, that are not proper advertised, that need improving, etc. 2) The more a vendor can gather and learn about smaller populations of its customer base (smallest customer unit is the actual individual customer) the more targeted the vendor can be in its marketing/advertising effort. Wouldn't it be nice if the only junk mail you got would be the junk mail you actually are interested in reading. (i.e. I love reading the ad-flyers from Future Shop, Radio Shack, The Brick. I quickly throw away flyers from grocery stores, women's clothing, etc.). The same would hold true in the electronic marketing world. I don't really mind seeing peripheral view ads on web sites that are about something I am actually interested in. 3) The argument would be brought up that some vendors track your smallest and most detailed habits in order to subconcsiously manipulate your buying decision. So what? If Walmart learned that by putting CDs on Isle 5 instead of Isle 4 makes me buy them more frequently - good for them. I am not one of a herd of cows that doesn't know why I am doing or buying something. I still am in control of choosing what I want to buy. In fact, the vendor might be more effectively showing me a product that I was looking for but didn't realize existed in the store. So, based on the fact that there is actual value for the consumer derived from the vendors ability to learn their customer's habits, needs, wants, desires; the bigger question is: "How can a product like Digital-Me allow the vendor to learn as much about me - the individual consumer - with out having the ability to abuse their powers with this information or use it in a ill-desired way (ie. selling the information as a product itself, using it to annoy me, etc.)?" One idea is might be that Digital-Me could provide an anonymous version of me that lets the vendors learn everything they want regarding my habits, but not about who the real me is (no real phone number or mailing address). This is a bit restrictive for the vendor but it does allow the vendor to understand how I shop and what I am interested in. It also lets them electronically market to me if and when I enter their electronic store-front. When the anonymous me walks into their web-site, they can custom-stock their electronic store shelves with items I would be interested in (i.e. put the skirts, blouses, barbie-dolls away if I were to walk into their store). Since many vendors have a desire to push information to me, then maybe in the future with the help of Digital-Me a solution could be devised whereby vendors could mail to a proxy address (ie. a form of a PO Box) or to a Proxy Phone Number. In fact, the vendors might be asked to pay a credit unit or point for the right to have access to these proxy contacts to the actual consumer - similar to Air Miles. The vendors would be able to send highly targeted marketing information to their consumer and the consumer would in effect be paid to be marketed to. These point - once enough has been accumulated - could be used like cash to purchase products and services to these same participating vendors. Example - if Radio Shack were a participating Digital-Me vendor and want to send mailing information to all customers that have shown an interest in Stereo Equipment. They would agree to paying each Digital-Me consumer in this specific community "50 Digital-Me Purchae Points" for the right to market to them. The Consumer would receive the mail from the vendor via a proxied mail slot, receive the 50 points into their accounts, and do with the information what they pleased. Later, the consumer could use the "digital-me purchase points" at Radio Shack or any other Digital-Me vendor. The concept of interest-group communities would become extremely valuable with solutions like this. Also, the information about us as consumers within Digital-Me would have to be collected, analyzed and catagorized by an internal engine within Digital-Me. In this way the vendor would simply query Digital-Me on the community characteristics it is looking for and the community would be built for this request. It could then be taken down just as easily. Some communities could be permanent and exist for other reasons (ie. the "red-neck gun buyers community" whereby the members wish to maintain a formal group with possble group-classed influences when approaching a vendor). Just a couple ideas in my head. I have a ton more, but first we need to get the basic Digital-Me product and service out the door from Novell. I am pretty sure based on what I know about the product that i would not initial be designed to do such stuff - BUT - it could easily be able to technically perform this "Consumer-Vendor" liaison role. Time to rest - I blabbed enough in this post. Toy