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: abbigail who wrote (12315)	1/7/2000 9:24:00 AM
From: Z268	Respond to of 21876

I watched McGinn this morning on CNBC, and I agree. The impression I got was that LU knew where they screwed up, but McGinn offered no convincing arguments how they are going to get themselves out of this.

To: abbigail who wrote (12315)	1/7/2000 10:41:00 AM
From: sandy carter	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 21876

hi, what does it mean, "didn"t execute?', execute what..? scuse ignorance please, this is a tad confusing. sandy

To: abbigail who wrote (12315)	1/7/2000 2:22:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21876

Abbigail, Maybe being a CPA is part of your problem (no insult is intended here). CPAs are trained in generating GAAP reports, but I think they are insufficiently trained in understanding the implications of the numbers they generate. Financial analysts and forensic accountants are trained to look past the numbers. I'm sure that you remember that in the bad old days changes in the financial condition of a company were generally reported on a working capital basis. Now a cash flow statement is mandated, which is much more intuitive and makes analysis so much easier. Unfortunately, few people take the time to look at this, the most revealing of all financial statements (IMO). When I looked at LU's numbers I saw trouble brewing in several areas. Specifically, I questioned high levels of A/R, inventory, the percentage reduction in the provision for doubtful accounts, and what appeared to me to be a misstatement of operating cash flows by shifting $625MM in A/R to the QSPE. I did not foresee a shortfall in revenues, but given the concerns I listed above, perhaps I should have. GVTucker was absolutely correct when he pointed out that the issues I raised frequently portend revenue problems. Here is a suggestion. Look at the cash flow statement and the income statement side by side, and ask yourself whether the cash flow adjustments make sense from an operational perspective. We know that annual cash flow from operations was negative while earnings were very strong. We can explain away some of the differences by the cumulative effect of accounting changes and by expenditures for restructuring. But the remaining difference requires explanation. Why did inventories and A/Rs rise precipitously? Here is a textbook you might want to buy: Financial Warnings. Sorry, but I can't remember the author. TTFN, CTC