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 : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jane4IceCream who wrote (31666)	8/9/2000 10:06:20 PM
From: Mark Konrad	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

IFMX...this has been an old friend (fiend?) for a coupla years now. A terrific trader since it crashed on "accounting irregularities" a few years ago, it never regained Wall Street's respect (although Bob F. did a great job, imo). Much of the "cause of death" of IFMX has been laid at the feet of former CEO Phil White. As the SEC investigated, moral slumped, talent left, and stockholders became bagholders; the price crashed from the 30's to about 4 bucks and change (as I remember). Bob Finoccio took the reigns and provided strong leadership (imo) and was rumored to be talking to several potential partners for IFMX. Nothing happened, again imo, because rivals ORCL, MSFT and IBM had already consolidated market share. IFMX had to scrounge for comparative crumbs and niches along with Sybase and Novell. However, the crumbs grew and one of IFMX's niches (internet commerce and related databases) literally exploded. Revenues and profits were growing quarter after quarter and the stock appreciated nicely (IFMX was a double for me, twice!). Then Bob F. resigned for "personal reasons," a nice but uninspiring Pierre Dexmier took over, and accounting problems cropped up again wiping out whatever credibility had previously been restored. The stock sank like a rock. All this is too bad, as the company does have a number of outstanding products (this according to friends in the industry). But superior technology does not always win out if management stumbles or is inept (or worse). "Even the finest cabernet stinks to high heaven when served with a bucket of rotting fish." (I claim authorship!) So, I now look at IFMX purely as a chart play with reasonable fundamentals (as Spirit points out). I hope it does another double or a triple quintuple but I do not believe IFMX can ever become anything more than a niche player on its own. They dropped the ball in a big way at least two or three times now. As far as any takeover is concerned...speculation is fun but they've been down that buyout road before. The question is "who would buy IFMX and why?" Larry Ellison could buy IFMX tomorrow with ashtray change from all his cars and boats but the two companies products are incompatible. Bill Gates could sneeze more money than IFMX's market cap but why taunt the DOJ for peanuts? Nope, a partner or suitor for IFMX (if there is one) will likely come from an unlikely place. My foggy crystal ball has a few potentials but I would be interested in anyone else's thoughts backed up with good reasons. How about a "Top Ten List of Potential IFMX Buyers?" I throw the subject out to anyone who wants to start as long as it doesn't interfere with Rande's guidelines regarding off-topic posts during the market day. In the meantime, yeah, I think we'll make good money trading IFMX (see the "Bonehead Update" for my opinion on the important numbers). Regards, Mark