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 : Sycamore Networks Inc-(SCMR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Fulop who wrote (800)	11/4/1999 5:20:00 PM
From: Wizard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2249

>>I guess I have more DD to do, as I thought Ciena was also in that space... but thanks for the comments. Ciena IS in the 'space.' Sycamore claims they are more optical than everybody else. I guess there is a lot of confusion about how optical/electrical Sycamore really is... You wouldn't know it from the valuation of SCMR but they haven't really articulated just what they can do that nobody else can. All I know is, CIEN just got $40mm out of Williams and that is SCMR's big account. CIEN stock could put in a nice move. Hopefully, SCMR will take a dip so I can buy it and put it away. Dan Smith (CEO of SCMR) knows what he is doing and this is clearly a blue-chip internet infrastructure company.

To: James Fulop who wrote (800)	11/5/1999 10:23:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2249

James, for what it's worth -- and I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case here-- but if a carrier believes that it will scale large enough, and they plan on a multi-year deployment, they may very well select two different vendors (if they could be normalized to a standard set of functions) and play one against the other in a leveraged way, and go with both for the same type of point solution, throughout their fabric. The Inter-exchange and LEC carriers have done this extensively with their DCS elements, as they have historically with their Class 5s and other forms of big ticket items. As the optical layer becomes standardized to within a certain list of expectations, we may see the same things begin to occur in the DWDM and other optical element areas, but before widespread standardization is the reason for this, there's another set of circumstances at play. One aspect of this has to do with being compatible with others with whom a carrier needs to "hand off", either in the long haul or at the terminus point. In many instances --most instances, in fact-- a carrier will share borders with other carriers who possess dissimilar platforms. What takes place from there are individual business decisions relating to peering relationships in the ISP sense, and co-carriering and meet-point criteria, in the traditional telco sense. I think you see what I'm saying. It needn't be one or the other, exclusively. In fact, at some point it "can't" be one or the other in such a pluralistic setting as pervasive internetworking, unless all of the standards as I began stating earlier, above, are so rigidly set and interoperability criteria are so stringently met, by all. Don't hold your breath on this one, though. And like I said: For what it's worth. Regards, Frank Coluccio