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 : George Gilder - Forbes ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pat mudge who wrote (3730)	4/28/2000 6:06:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 5853

Pat: It is with great sadness that I write this. You spotted the fiberoptics tornado early and you are clearly a fine researcher and writer, so what is going on with your all out attack on George Gilder as a person? Why? Do you have any idea if your charges have any basis? The other attackers here fall from their own invective - zero credibility. Yet you have a fine reputation built up over years of analysis and reporting. What has you off on this tangent? Puzzled. Chaz

To: pat mudge who wrote (3730)	4/28/2000 8:52:00 PM
From: GOPbabe	Respond to of 5853

Hello Pat. I am curious, do you always send others to write your emails? You must be an important person. It's an honor to have your fingers grace the keyboards. Regards, Merylee

To: pat mudge who wrote (3730)	4/29/2000 6:07:00 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5853

Dear Pat: You will likely be attacked for your post. Let me just say that your findings are comparable to my own and I agree with your conclusions. I dont personally harbor any dark thoughts about George though as it is my understanding he discusses technology and its opportunities without saying the stock is or isnt a good buy in the circumstances. Too many people blindly follow his stocks without doing any research of their own to examine not the technology but the myraid of other things which effect a STOCKS value. I posted something to that the day he recommended that company but in all fairness, I must admit, those who bought that day have certainly seen it rise rapidly, my only advice is sell it while you can and count yourself very fortunate. JDN

To: pat mudge who wrote (3730)	5/2/2000 1:36:00 AM
From: George Gilder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5853

I read all that stuff. It is irrelevant to their major invention--the powermux--which enables the emergence of circuit switched optical networks based on flexible wavelengths: any wavelength, any spacing, any bitrate. They now have many customers beyond the ones you mention and they have the single most impressive optical engineer in the industry, Simon Cao. I know nothing about lockups and such, but this company is in for the long haul, and the last mile too. --GG

To: pat mudge who wrote (3730)	5/8/2000 3:44:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Respond to of 5853

Pat, A discussion you want? Ok. Let's start by examining a few of your bolded summations from your post. Re: "$50 million in losses, $10 million in revenues:" Hmmm...you rounded 10.9 down to 10. 50 million covers years since inception while 10.9 million covers 6 months. More recent information was available to you when you posted which indicates that the 6 month revenues mentioned above were about matched in the most recent 3 months alone. New net revs hence total over 22 million from a prior year base of zero. Huh, and 65% Q to consecutive Q revenue growth. siliconinvestor.com Re: "One product represents 99% of sales:" That may have been changing rapidly as per information available before you posted. Re: "One customer represents 85% of revenues:" That may have been changing rapidly as per information available before you posted. Re: "Volume manufacturing faces challenges not seen by "evaluation units": ...Qualification of manufacturing lines not guaranteed:" Standard disclaimers are pretty ominous to you in this case, I guess. Have you some reason you'd like to share with us to suspect AVNX shouldn't likely meet the challenge? That would make a worthy point we'd all appreciate, if so. Re: "Fujitsu license agreement prevents possibility of being acquired:" No, as your pasted info. says, it "may" have an anti-takeover effect- the use of "prevents" represents your practical opinion, I take it. Given the 65% Q to consecutive Q growth rate, a positive view of this information and your opinion may be warranted, in my opinion. Re: "International Sales involves 2 Distributors:" I didn't see any indication that these are the only two international distributors, maybe so though. Did you check that out before writing the above? If so please advise. Perhaps something showing that the initial ramp to international sales is inadequate would be helpful too. Re: "Customer Service totals 2 people:" False, according to the information you posted. TOTAL customer services also includes the help of the two(or more?) international distributors mentioned above. I'd note that given the very recent(only within the last year) start of sales and revenues, the Customer service department is probably more than adequate, not representative of any lack of attention, and conversely it's likely not wasteful overkill. Have you a reason to suspect the customer service is inadequate for current conditions? Perhaps the new customers will require some expansion of customer service not likely to be completed for some reason? Such an argument might be helpful to all. I hope this helps others to understand the full value of your research and bolded summations. Dan B