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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/23/2000 8:27:00 PM
From: freeus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Rather an alarming article: hope UF replies! Freeus

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/23/2000 9:00:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

I don't pretend to fully understand a company as complex as Cisco or an inustry as complex as the networking sector, but I do agree with the author's contention that prices are extraordinarily high. But I've got a much simpler reason for believing that than the author's -- that a stock can't forever grow exponentially faster than a company's earnings as has been happening with Cisco's stock. For those interested in the author's point that operating expenses are growing too fast, more research should be done. Don't take the comparison between two quarters as a harbinger of gloom or doom. Examine the data comparing at least the most recent four quarters. The point that I disagree with is the idea that the old-economy businesses now have the necessary bandwidth needed for future years. That makes no sense to me based on every trend I'm seeing. If the author is right about that, I'd sure hate to be in the position of Cisco's competitors more than in the position of Cisco itself. --Mike Buckley

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/23/2000 9:59:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Re Rick Ackerman, the man makes his living pandering to the fears of his flock. Use the following as an example of his skill at prognostication: gold-eagle.com Since he draws on parallels between Dell and Cisco, it might be in order to send him a copy of the fm so he can distinguish between a Prince and a Gorilla. But I somehow doubt that would deter him from spreading FUD. uf

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/23/2000 11:37:00 PM
From: Archie Meeties	Respond to of 54805

LOL, What a fool, that guy doesn't know jack about CSCO. Ignore him. Like all Gorillas these days, it remains a compelling buy.

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/24/2000 12:12:00 AM
From: Juliet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

CSCO Article: that publication's "10 Stocks For 10 Years" Here is Fleet Street Letter's big 10 LTB&H stock picks--to perhaps help locate the CSCO article within the context of the publisher's investment philosophy: Sara Lee Office Depot Ingersoll Rand Maytag Co. (MYG:nyse) Honda Motor Company (HMC:nyse) Northrop Grumman (NOC:nyse) Centex (CTX:nyse) Construction Robert Half International Inc (RHI:nyse) Office Temps TJX Companies Inc. (TJX:nyse) Retail Apparel AMR Corporation (AMR:nyse) Airlines fleetstreetletter.com

To: voop who wrote (23329)	4/24/2000 10:10:00 AM
From: Knight	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

"When you include the company's extravagant stock option giveaways.." I'm mainly a lurker here, but couldn't resist responding to the above in the Ackerman article. What Ackerman points to as a weakness, I see as one of Cisco's most important strengths. Namely, they understand the extreme importance of employee retention to a new economy tech company. I used to work for a once successful well-known tech company that didn't seem to understand this. They eventually met with difficult times, and whenever there was a bad quarter and a layoff occurred, the R&D organization usually got the ax along with everyone else. Stock options of any significance seemed to be targeted primarily at management and an elite few technical folks. Of course, each time this happened morale plummeted and they lost tremendous technical personnel--some of them, irreplaceable--although I'm not sure management realized this. Of course, the company didn't survive. They never seemed to understand that they were eating their seed corn. I wonder what could have been accomplished by that company if they'd only valued their employee retention the way Cisco does. In today's economy where tech talent is a scarce commodity, companies that don't let allow employees to directly reap the benefits of a company success are destined to failure. Disclaimer: I am not employed by Cisco.