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 : Terayon - S CDMA player (TERN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (708)	4/16/2000 8:02:00 PM
From: uthabros	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1658

Barb Bear, isn't it enough for shorts to make money and smile all the way to the bank? What's all this nonsense about getting credit for a good call? Longs of any stock don't ask for your help in saving them with your good call. Is it that making money on a good call is not enough? Do you shorts need attention and recognition in your life? I wish I was good enough at shorting to make the money you all seem to be making. But, I wouldn't be looking for credit.Geez

To: Mama Bear who wrote (708)	4/17/2000 5:38:00 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1658

Mama Bear, Fine and well, but I would add what they should NOT do. 1) Demean themselves and others with analsex jokes and inappropriate false identities(though it's true these actions shouldn't preclude giving credit for good short calls- I just wanted to remind folks how juvenile these particular shorts are). 2) Make false statements about the companies they short. Pluvia for instance, stated simply that TERN "again" denied its DOCSIS modems are made by someone else, when in fact TERN had just acknowledged same in a conference call. Heres Pluvia after the call: " TERN MAKES NO DOCSIS MODEM - THEY JUST RE-SELL A TURBONET REPACKAGED MODEM... And this is true, they make no DOCSIS modems a fact TERN has failed to disclose to shareholders - again! " Message 13401744 As I say, TERN had acknowledged Turbonet specifically and verbally earlier the very day Pluvia stated this. I suppose he just hadn't listened and/or was unaware, LOL. I've got a bridge I'll sell ya too. The fact that an OEM made parts for TERN DOCSIS modems has been known to this thread for quite a while. I firmly believe this sort of posting is worse than reprehensible. Of course, TERNs DOCSIS modems aren't even significant in terms of current business. And of course, TERN never claimed to "make" it themselves- although I suspect they assemble it themselves. There was no recognition by "Pluvia" that TERN's OEM'd DOCSIS modems have had little if any bearing on their margins to date(the vast bulk of TERN modem sales have clearly been S-CDMA)- instead a claimed negative effect on margins was insinuated- followed by silence on the issue when such known mitigating facts were pointed out. NO, I can't respect these methods. Furthermore, I gather it's a near certainty that future TDMA and/or TDMA/S-CDMA DOCSIS modems which TERN will likely submit for certification when the time comes, would be self-made. More importantly, in the current suits against TERN, statements pertaining to Cablelabs position on the inclusion of S-CDMA in DOCSIS are made which are false, IMO, without a doubt. This is plain and worthy of legal action on the part of Terayon, IMO. If they bother to offer a countersuit, they'll win it easily IMO. Claims that Terayon has misled investors about DOCSIS for a long time- made here on this thread- seem highly suspect when the filings include the likes of the following, from 11/99 for instance: "If CableLabs does not adopt an enhancement to the DOCSIS specifications based on S-CDMA technology, or if it adopts a version that is substantially different than what we propose, it is likely our future revenues and operating results will be adversely affected." Yup, they really make a concerted effort to make us think S-CDMA in DOCSIS is a done deal, eh? LOL. And... "We have already given CableLabs assurances that we will contribute some aspects of our proprietary S-CDMA technology to a royalty-free intellective property pool, if S-CDMA is included in a future version of DOCSIS..." Note the "IFs." Yeah, they continue to mislead, LOL. And... "It is expected that the DOCSIS specifications that include specifications for advanced PHY will be based upon both S-CDMA and advanced TDMA technology. In that event, we will have to incorporate advanced TDMA technology into our DOCSIS compliant products. If we are unable to do this effectively, or in a timely manner, we will lose some or all of the time-to- market advantage we might otherwise have had." All above quotes from: corporate-ir.net Yes, they expect to get S-CDMA in DOCSIS. Nothing is wrong in that, of course. Rakib stated in the recent conference call that they currently expect to be building their own DOCSIS modem including both TDMA and S-CDMA next fall. He honestly stated that Cablelabs has not accepted an advanced Phy standard nor even given a time table for a certifications process as yet. But we do know TERN has available the info to get the TDMA job done since they still are one of the authors submitting the TDMA proposal(not that Com 21 or any others don't have such up to the minute info., too). And the S-CDMA, selling well in parts of the world where standards other than DOCSIS may evolve, is something which I KNOW they already spent years concentrating their efforts on- and that having been accomplished, and being a TDMA contributor themselves, I'm relatively confident they can successfully build their own next gen. TDMA modems. JMHO though. FWIW Mama Bear, I don't own nor have a position in this stock of any kind and never have. I've been interested in it for years now. I advised of my suspicion quite awhile back that this might be bought much cheaper in the future. I might like to own it in the future myself, and would certainly like to get in as cheaply as possible if I do. But that's just not cause enough for me to shut-up here. Dan B Freedom Works