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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kent Rattey who wrote (9861)	4/28/2000 10:27:00 AM
From: pat mudge	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24042

The chief source of ETEK's technology was Simon Cao (38 years old, 36 patents, and an optical genius). As I described in an earlier GTR, Cao is now producing his patents and inventions for Avanex." The S-8 states they have one patent issued and the rest pending. Many are jointly held. I've read the full TGR article and find it inexcusably lacking in information as it pertains to making investment decisions. If he's the Jules Verne of the telecosm and as such is merely informing the public about future technological breakthroughs, he should make an attempt to write in a manner that reflects a more scholarly approach, not focus on making a killing in the stock market. Do his subscribers pay the yearly fee to read about break-through technologies or to get a leap on other momentum players and pocket the gains? There's a chasm between what he says he does and what he does. No matter how well-intentioned he is, in reality he's running a glorified Ponzi Scheme. Pat

To: Kent Rattey who wrote (9861)	4/28/2000 11:32:00 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24042

I have met and spoken to him personally, and made a fortune with a LTBH strategy. So have many others; hence GG's popularity. I have benefited from his reports in the past, but I no longer have a lot of confidence in or respect for his opinions. I feel he tends to reduce technologies to vapid slogans. For example, ATT Wireless' IPO is an "Irredeemably Pathetic Offering" since the co. is TDMA-based. Well, as of yesterday, I switched back to ATT Wireless since Sprint PCS has poor service in Austin. I had previously dumped ATT in favor of Sprint as a vote for QCOM, but in the past six months I have averaged 25 dropped calls a month with Sprint (using the latest and greatest Samsung SCH-3500). I almost never had a dropped call with ATT in the preceding year using a Nokia 6160. When I talked to the Sprint rep to cancel my account, he informed me that many people in Austin have left Sprint due to network problems. This is not for lack of effort on the part of Sprint, but tuning a CDMA network is no simple affair, even according to the RF engineers on the QCOM thread. This is the kind of thing GG skips over. Since Sprint cannot even deliver acceptable digital voice service to me, I remain skeptical about their ability to execute with high-speed packet data. Meanwhile, as the huge support behind WCDMA gains momentum, GG goes on about how great cdma2000 and QCOM are. No mention of QCOM's recent loony plot to foist their own cdma2000 network on Japan. This is another kind of thing GG skips over. I just can't relate to his stuff anymore.