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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (70680)	10/31/1999 11:33:00 PM
From: John Koligman	Respond to of 97611

Not to mention the fact that IBM essentially did not grow at all the first few years of Gerstner's regime. It was a cost cutting story. Then there's Dell, growing strongly this year, except in stock price. Another bug in the model, I guess <gggg>.... Regards, John

To: rudedog who wrote (70680)	11/1/1999 1:40:00 AM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

I suppose that one can invest without regard to the fundamentals of the company. As to your assumption that IBM is growing at 25% of the industry growth rate, I ask you which industry? IBM is into services, PC's, Servers, software, storage systems, disk drives and components. I'll have a better answer for you tomorrow when my fundamental data is accessible. I subscribe more to the Malkiel view on stock price. Market psychology is but one aspect of the stock pricing. Perhaps, CPQ can hype their stock with a massive PR campaign and sell people on buying. They certainly have done it before. They have a lot of angry investors too. This type of hype is really just fraud under the guise of free speech IMO.

To: rudedog who wrote (70680)	11/1/1999 4:33:00 AM
From: rupert1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

rudedog: Were there not statements in 2Q (at the time the reduction in channel partners was announced) that the eventual target for inventory in channel was about 7-10 days? In response to my post last week, you suggested that in 3Q CPQ had arrived at its ultimate target of 2 weeks. Consequently, you suggested, there would be no further reduction in pro forma revenues (booked revenues) to account for further reductions in inventory. Th 4Q usually sees a build-up of PC inventory in channel to insure that product is available for heavy seasonal demand (leading to a discounting of surplus inventory in 1Q). If this occurs again then booked revenues may see a temporary blip. A CNET article states that 3Q results show 3 weeks. Can you confirm the 2 weeks? If it was 3 weeks, do you think the push to 2 weeks (and consequent reduction in booked revenues) will come this quarter given the seasonal need for additional inventory? On the channel question - and leaving aside the special issue of booked revenues - do you think all the other cost savings expected from the reduction to 4 channel partners has been achieved? If so, should we not be getting a lot closer to DELL's costs by now?