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: Bindusagar Reddy who wrote (11661)	12/14/1999 9:53:00 PM
From: KYA27	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21876

Bind,Here is a post that was on yahoo about spinning off Bell Labs.let me know what you think...would this be a good idea? The discussion on patents and Bell Labs got me thinking about a great way for LU to increase shareholder value. Spinoff Bell Labs!! Companies are outsourcing things like payroll, human resources, manufacturing, accounting, customer service, etc. Why not R&D as well. Outsourcing R&D eliminates having to pay salaries and benefits for scientists and their support and administrative staff. If Bell Labs was spunoff many companies could use them to develop new products while saving on all these costs. As companies eliminated their R&D staffs BL could grow by adding the best of the displaced scientists. As products developed by BL for these companies start generating revenues BL gets a percentage of the profits. I could see the possibility of BL stock outperforming LU! Come on Rich! Make us all richer!! Spinoff Bell Labs!!!

To: Bindusagar Reddy who wrote (11661)	12/14/1999 10:12:00 PM
From: jack bittner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21876

BR, it was very good of you to send me the warburg commentary on lucent opto; which did much to keep me on track about lu. i'm puzzled that neither you, nor anyone else, addresses my questions about lucent's "ultra-dense" wdm lab product 37 gigs OC-48 versus nortel's actual sales of 10 gig OC-192 products which they've used to build out almost all present long-haul fibre networks. is the "ultra-dense" not pertinent to the long-haul. if not, what is its utility? i'm sure the very informed Mr.F is right that essentially the 2 are neck and neck and each'll get their share. but i would like to understand these 2 key products made by each of my major holdings. is it that a) the basic reason to own lu and nt is because they build the highway that everything else serves or uses, and b) that highway is in OC-192 for now and the near future? that all else, however important and profitable, is peripheral? i put it as a question, i may be 'way off base. i wish someone would tell me exactly what OC-48 and OC-192 ARE? and why sending data at 37 gigs isn't superior to sending it at 10 gigs because the 37 gigs is in OC-48 while the 10 gigs is in OC-192. lastly no one tries to guess how important qtera's 2,000mi w/o regeneration technology is to lu and nt. are these two questioins simply unimportant. or could they lead to a "disruptive technology", as george gilder's colleague calls it, that both lu and nt had better heed. if i find the answers off this thread, BR, i'll put them on here. thanks again, sincerely.

To: Bindusagar Reddy who wrote (11661)	12/14/1999 10:57:00 PM
From: Techplayer	Respond to of 21876

BR, Very interesting information. Thanks for posting it. Brian.