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 : LEGATO SYSTEMS LGTO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoro who wrote (871)	3/20/2000 7:13:00 PM
From: KevRupert	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1138

It does familiar. That is painful to hear again. mstr shareholders are taking pain today! I feel for them. I really do, because a gap down like that is hard to take. I've got to take my pepto at times like that. Lgto has definately bounced back nicely though.

To: Zoro who wrote (871)	3/20/2000 10:39:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Respond to of 1138

Re:MSTR Message 13245518

To: Zoro who wrote (871)	3/21/2000 12:12:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1138

Zorro, Some additional thoughts on MSTR vs. LGTO: From what I gather (and I am no expert on MSTR), there is quite a difference between MSTR's problem and LGTO's. In LGTO's case, all of the usual hurdles for revenue recognition had been met, but since the final purchaser was an ASP, PW raised the question of the probability of payment, and so, decided on a revenue recognition stream analogous to a service contract. This represents a more stringent accounting test than existed in the past. In MSTR's case, service contracts were booked as revenues rather than deferred revenues as required by GAAP. This has always been an accounting no-no, and they probably got caught because they need to raise additional capital. I think this is a particularly egregious case of financial engineering. TTFN, CTC