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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Monty Lenard who wrote (35393)	5/10/2000 9:50:00 PM
From: lawdog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77397

Anther bearish article. This at TSC. Shining a Light on Cisco's Opticals Weakness By Scott Moritz Staff Reporter 5/10/00 8:39 PM ET thestreet.com [excerpt] "Investors have long known that Cisco dominates the market for equipment that connects computers. But now they're catching on to the fact that it is scrambling to catch up in a less sexy but equally lucrative area: the market for equipment that enables people to talk to one another. Cisco's earnings report showed sales to telephone companies rose just 15% from second-quarter levels, falling short of many observers' expectations. Now, having lost out to rival Nortel (NT:NYSE - news - boards) in a key acquisition, Cisco faces the prospect that weakness in optical transport equipment -- the backbone of next-generation phone carriers -- could further pressure a stock that, at 170 times trailing earnings, is still rather pricey. "Nortel has always held the high end of the high-speed market and this sort of solidifies their positioning as the player to beat," says Cooperson. "It's clear Cisco wants to play in the long-haul market. The question is whether they'll be able to do it internally ... or externally through another acquisition.'" Ah oh mercy, mercy me Ah things ain't what they used to be, no no Marvin Gaye

To: Monty Lenard who wrote (35393)	5/11/2000 4:51:00 AM
From: SyncMan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

Thanks for the reply, Monty... I think any company selling for the pe's and price to sales ratios companies like CSCO are selling for will have to AT THIS POINT be included in SPECULATIVE stocks. This might be a definition thing, but I think you are talking over priced, not speculation. Speculation (to me) is when you are betting on a nothing becoming a something. And Cisco, at 15 Billion growing at 55% revenue is certainly not nothing. Of course, if you are talking just about the stock, speculative might be a kind word for the short term. Not that CSCO is a bad company. I think anyone who said they were a bad company needs their head examined. They are a great company. The problem is that people have bid the price up too high. I don't care how good they are ... One other thing ... an elderly gentleman told me one time...."When the police raid the cat house ..they take the good girls AND the bad girls" The undervalued and great companies will go down also. Yes, but we can probably agree that the great companies will weather the storm better. Notice how well Lucent is doing since it's great tumble. One other thing that I think people best remember...the leaders of today will not necessarily be the leaders a few years from now. This is especially true of tech stocks!!! Yes, this is certainly true. You have to be vigilant, and not just buy and hold without paying attention. Especially tech. That saying, I don't see a company better run than Cisco right now and more likely to grow for the next 10 years or so. I may be wrong by a couple of companies here but if my memory is correct GE is the only Dow component that survived all the years since 29. GM maybe but I don't think so. Have you noticed how the brokers et al pull out charts going back 50 years and talk about how if people had just held they would be so many dollars ahead. That is PURE BS. The components of the DOW, S&P etc are changed constantly to preserve that LOOK. Just go back and check to see how much money you would have made if you owned all the Dow or S&P or Naz 100 ORIGINAL components. Wow! Since 29. I'm afraid I'm not that old. And with Tech, I think we can agree that 70 years is way past infinity. Let's stay within the next 10 or so. Let's say Cisco becomes number one or number two in: Building of the Internet II. Building of the Optical Infrastructure. A partner (with GE/etc) in turning every major household device into a web enabled device. Able to leverage it's lead in growths in China, India, etc. for the data world that started in the US. What will it's stock be worth in 7 years???????? Makes me want to smile. :)

To: Monty Lenard who wrote (35393)	5/11/2000 8:00:00 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77397

Monty, RE: Have you noticed how the brokers et al pull out charts going back 50 years and talk about how if people had just held they would be so many dollars ahead. That is PURE BS. Pure BS indeed. It all depends on where you start the clock and end the clock. Go back to 1980. Back then strategists were pulling out all kinds of charts that showed how hard assets (gold, oil & gas, real estate) outperformed paper assets (stocks & bonds) over the long run. Wealthy investors were having their assets put into real estate partnerships and oil & gas partnerships and gold bullion, all because some long term chart told them to. Of course, looking in the rear view mirror was a foolish strategy then, and those prescient enough to look forward and begin to see the back of inflation get broken could make a lot of money in paper assets and avoid losing a lot of money in hard assets. Fast forward to today, and look at the basic argument that you get from a lot of people who hold very expensive large cap stocks: "I have made a lot of money in this stock, consequently I will make a lot of money in the future with this stock." I just hope that I am patient enough to wait until the buy and hold mantra is completely destroyed until I buy aggressively.