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 : Corning Incorporated (GLW) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jack bittner who wrote (641)	7/2/2000 9:05:15 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2260

Jack, When you write "irony of ironies" I take it you mean I have no idea how much more glw is at the heart of the technology than is nt, or anyone else. I didn't mean to imply anything about GLW vis-a-vis NT. I'm not knowledgeable enough to do so. Rather, I was alluding (kind of ineptly) to the possible merger of GLW and SDLI (rumored; who knows if it's true yet). It would put our discussion in a bit of an ironic light (taking place here on the GLW thread where it doesn't belong after all), but "irony of ironies" was a bit hyperbolic on my part. I just can't resist The Zing <g>. Sorry, I don't know enough about GLW to give you a rundown on them...only the obvious stuff which I'm sure you know as well. I have only cursory knowledge of the capital-structure issues relating to the megacap systems providers. However, I tend to believe there is no free lunch, even in Canada. This means that I don't think NT can offer financing terms to carriers that pass through to banks with complete transparency. I say this in an a priori kind of way. If NT is able to pass off risk to creditors, then it must presumably make up the difference in terms of a spread debit (lower margins) or extended payment terms. You say they sell the paper, so obviously the banks are taking vig--otherwise, why would they bother? (Simply put, NT cannot give the banks all the risk without giving them some reward that NT would not have if the carriers could finance the purchases directly.) I really don't know about the particulars, but if you do, I'd be happy to be enlightened. On this subject, I have read recently that Cisco is starting to do some equipment financing. For an interesting take on NT vs. LU, see Message 13511782 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Qtera is a customer of JDSU and/or SDLI. When that purchase was made, I think there was a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth that it might be a "JDSU killer", but then people came up with reasons why this wasn't so. Perhaps if somebody knows they can put up the particulars. I am no expert on the industry, but the component guys don't seem to think they are going to go out of business in a few years. If they were smart enough to get this far, they should (hopefully) be smart enough to survive. Obviously, they are working on consolidating, widening their product lines, and moving up the food chain by providing modules and the like. I don't think there's any guaranteed winner in investing, but to me it makes sense to go where the growth and money is. Also, look at management. I think that matters more and more. On all counts, SDLI seems like a very attractive company. But the tech world always moves fast, so there's no rest for the wicked. BTW, I appreciate your input on NT.

To: jack bittner who wrote (641)	7/23/2000 8:11:00 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2260

And I think when NT's Qtera group perfects solitonic transmission, a huge chunk of components will be obsolete. Jack, I was wondering where you got your info on Qtera using solitons. At least one person was given the impression by Qtera engineers that Qtera is not into solitons. You might want to come up with some hard data before predicting the end of pumps. BTW, do you know who the leader in Raman is? Message 14001520 To: Gary who wrote (15293) From: Mr.Fun Thursday, Jul 6, 2000 11:13 AM ET Reply #15295 of 15513 The Qtera engineers told me at OFC that they were not using solitons, rather that they were using raman amplification to achieve their distance between regeneration. FYI Solitons are an alternative way to extend the distance between regeneration. The reason that signals need regeneration is as an optical pulse travels over a physical fiber the pulse changes shape, typically the leading edge travels slightly faster than the trailing edge due to refraction in the fiber. After 1000Km or so, the pulse becomes considerably more difficult to read and may bleed over into the previous pulse. Soliton technology resolves this by transmitting a pulse that is already distorted, but in a way that the natural refraction of the fiber brings the pulse into sharper focus rather than distorting further. As you can imagine, this is very difficult technology to implement. Research in soliton technology has gone on for more than a decade and there are still no commercial products.