SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Ariba Technologies (Nasdaq-ARBA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Patsy Collins who wrote (479)11/9/1999 3:24:00 PM
From: Patsy Collins  Respond to of 2110
 
From Morgan Stanley, more possible E-commerce stuff!

I believe the technology-driven capital spending boom has finally
ended the "productivity paradox." Courtesy of the breakthrough
"shared infrastructure" of the Internet, the technology boom has begun
to raise the economy's speed limit to 3%. However, this new limit
isn't guaranteed-I believe tht it hinges on a continued, intense
technology boom.

The good news: The boom is gathering strength. In my view, IT's
two defining characteristics-continuously falling prices and the
continuously growing value of the Internet's shared
infrastructure-assure that technology demand will continue to outpace
significantly the rest of the economy at least for the next few years.
Indeed, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter technology analysts believe that e-
commerce imperatives will likely sustain strong hardware, software and
telecommunications equipment demand for the foreseeable future,
overwhelming any temporary, Y2K-related slowing.

Technology's global spread is a secular development, and it
hasn't exterminated cyclical forces than can push up inflation or
create economic imbalances. But its spreading use has helped dampen
cyclical fluctuations and has made the economy more sensitive to price
signals.

DETAILS:

America's infatuation with Information Technology has never been at
such a fever pitch. Outlays for IT equipment, software and IT
services are running at a $500 billion annual clip, or 5.7% of nominal
GDP, and that figure doesn't include compensation for the army of IT
support workers, much less the $1.5 trillion in wealth created by the
rise in technology stock prices over the past year. Yet the debate
over the economic payoff from this technology boom has never been more
intense. While it is important to recognize that true shifts in
economic trends are slow to emerge, we believe that the jury has now
come in to render a verdict: The "productivity paradox"-sluggish
productivity growth in the face of rapid advances in and rapidly
growing use of information technology-is ending.

Yes, the boom in information technology has finally begun to pay off,
boosting productivity growth to about 2%, and thus the economy's
noninflationary speed limit to roughly 3%. This improvement
represents more than the typical cyclical pickup in productivity
growth that accompanies an acceleration in the economy. And it
represents more than just the explosion in productivity in the
industries that make this high-tech gear.

Two factors explain why the shift is at last now occurring: First, I
believe company strategies that use information technology to cut
costs, such as "just-in time" inventory management techniques, are
paying off in a significant way. Second, and more important, using
computers for many business functions didn't really pay off until they
could exchange information easily using the Internet's "shared
infrastructure"-sharing costs among all users avoids both the costs
and the risks of investing in the quickly-obsolete proprietary systems
of the 1980s and early 1990s. The Internet made possible the
explosion in business-to-business (B2B) commerce, which is just
gathering steam. And the upsurge in telecommunications capacity
should accelerate the process by making it cheaper. While we don't
capture the direct revenue or market impact of such strategies in this
analysis, I believe that the imperatives of e-commerce are driving the
booming demand for and economic impact of IT hardware.

These aren't just one-off improvements, because technology is
reshaping business strategies. Just as important, however, these
developments carry with them three critical caveats. First, the
resulting higher economic speed limit is not an eternal economic
constant. The high-productivity economy is a hungry machine, and will
have to be fed with continued rapid increases in high-tech investment
to sustain the higher rates of productivity growth. In that sense, a
self-sustaining, faster rate of improvement in our living standards is
far from a foregone conclusion. Fortunately, technology spending
growth seems likely to remain strong, as long as the promise of
further improvements and the lure of cheaper gear continue.

The second caveat is even more fundamental. A higher speed limit does
not mean that there are no speed limits. Far from it. Any
disinflationary dividend from the boost to productivity is a secular
development, recently amplified by the cyclical disinflationary
effects of the global financial crisis. The two swamped potential
inflation pressures resulting from three years of growth above the
economy's now-higher, sustainable pace. But our global healing story
is all about cyclical improvement in the global economy. As it
recalibrates inflation expectations to precrisis levels, those dormant
inflation pressures likely will slowly resurface.

A final word of caution: Recently, productivity has accelerated to a
rate that tempts an even more favorable conclusion about the economy's
speed limit. New estimates of GDP imply that nonfarm business
productivity rose by an average 2 1/4% per year over the past five
years (vs. 1.7% previously) and nearly 2 3/4% in the past two years.
Moreover, estimated as gross domestic income per hour rather than real
gross product per hour, productivity over the past two years rose by 3
3/4% percent at an annual rate. Is the speed limit thus as much as 3
1/2% or even higher? We doubt it. The evidence we consider in the
latest Inside the U.S. Economy seems broadly consistent with 3%.

This nuanced view hardly resolves the technology-cum-productivity
conundrum, but I had no expectation of finding the grail when I set
out on the journey. Our position is cautious compared with the
sweeping optimism of the "new paradigm" analysts who believe that the
digital revolution has ushered in an era of inflation-free growth. On
the other hand, our view seems to stand in contrast with Steve Roach's
belief that the productivity paradox is alive and well in the U.S.
economy. Yet Steve and I strongly agree about two things. First, the
accelerating pace of technological innovation will reshape the U.S.
and global economies, and both Europe and Japan seem poised on the
cusp of a technology spending spree that will rival our own. And
second, U.S. companies are perfectly positioned to benefit from this
global boom as it unfolds.

Note: This is an excerpt from "The Technology Boom and the U.S.
Economy: Paradigm Found or Paradox Revisited" in Inside the U.S.
Economy, November 8, 1999. Please contact your Morgan Stanley Dean
Witter representative for a copy or locate one on Client Link at
www.ms.com.

The information and opinions in this report were prepared by Morgan
Stanley & Co. Incorporated ("Morgan Stanley Dean Witter"). Morgan
Stanley Dean Witter does not undertake to advise you of changes in its
opinion or information. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter and others
associated with it may make markets or specialize in, have positions
in and effect transactions in securities of companies mentioned and
may also perform or seek to perform investment banking services for
those companies.
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. and/or
their affiliates or their employees have or may have a long or short
position or holding in the securities, options on securities, or other
related investments of issuers mentioned herein.
The investments discussed or recommended in this report may not be
suitable for all investors. Investors must make their own investment
decisions based on their specific investment objectives and financial
position and using such independent advisors as they believe
necessary. Where an investment is denominated in a currency other
than the investor's currency, changes in rates of exchange may have an
adverse effect on the value, price of, or income derived from the
investment. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future
performance. Income from investments may fluctuate. The price or
value of the investments to which this report relates, either directly
or indirectly, may fall or rise against the interest of investors.
To our readers in the United Kingdom: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter,
regulated by the Securities and Futures Authority Limited, and/or its
affiliates may be providing or may have provided significant advice or
investment services, including investment banking services, for any
company mentioned in this report. Private investors should obtain the
advice of their Morgan Stanley Dean Witter representative about the
investments concerned.
This publication is disseminated in Japan by Morgan Stanley Japan
Limited and in Singapore by Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Asia
(Singapore) Pte.
To our readers in the United States: While Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
has prepared this report, Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Dean
Witter Reynolds Inc. are distributing the report in the US and accept
responsibility for it contents. Any person receiving this report and
wishing to effect transactions in any security discussed herein should
do so only with a representative of Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated
or Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
To our readers in Spain: AB Asesores Bursatiles Bolsa SVB, S.A., a
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter group company, supervised by the Spanish
Securities Markets Commission (CNMV), hereby states that this document
has been written and distributed in accordance with the rules of
conduct applicable to financial research as established under Spanish
regulations.
To our readers in Australia: This publication has been issued by
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter but is being distributed in Australia by
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Australia Limited A.C.N. 003 734 576, a
licensed dealer, which accepts responsibility for its contents. Any
person receiving this report and wishing to effect transactions in any
security discussed in it may wish to do so with an authorized
representative of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Australia Limited.
To our readers in Canada: This publication has been prepared by
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter and is being made available in certain
provinces of Canada by Morgan Stanley Canada Limited. Morgan Stanley
Canada Limited has approved of, and has agreed to take responsibility
for, the contents of this information in Canada.
Additional information on recommended securities is available on
request.

Copyright 1999 Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co.



To: Patsy Collins who wrote (479)11/9/1999 5:53:00 PM
From: William F. Wager, Jr.  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 2110
 
Saw Laslow Birinyi interviewed last night. He thinks the
Nasdaq ends the year at 3500 (remember he was the only one
even close to predicting where we are now-- 2900 he said
in Jan. '99). His reason...too many MMs have missed the
move and must play catchup by years end. Money will be
leaving the sidelines.

--Bill