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.

Pastimes : CNBC -- critique. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (6373)	8/10/2000 5:29:09 PM
From: swisstrader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

Really, you guys crack me up...to be "vindicated" on the day based on the fact that the stock was down after reporting respectable earnings has little or no meaning to anyone with even an ounce of knowledge about how CSCO trades or their success...further, it wasn't JUST CNBC that seemed to think that CSCO had a terrific Q (and a wildly upbeat con call), it was also the likes of the WSJ, the NYTimes, TheStreet.Com, CBSMarketWatch and boatloads of others who simply reported the facts and the facts are CSCO done real well...the only difference is that CNBC is a TV network and all the others are print media meaning the cheerleading, as you put it, gets muted by the black and white printed page...again, get a clue. Check out how "vindicated" you feel when you consider the fact that CSCO has now ONLY doubled in the last 12 months and is up ONLY 24% on the year and the wireless net will only continue to feed the fire...I feel very sorry for those who have been short the stock or watched from the sidelines...a continuing success story in every sense. p.s. Dell just loaded up some FABULOUS news as well, so I suggest all you tech bears run immediately for cover!

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (6373)	8/10/2000 9:59:31 PM
From: Ted David	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17683

Two things... 1) Ever hear of "selling the news?" This is not the first time, nor will it be the last that some folks take some money off the table after a favorable earnings report. If you don't like CSCO, sell it. (If you own it) Your call, your choice. 2) Why are you singling me out in your messages? You act as though I told some kind of lie on the air. If you have isssues, send them to management at the address below. V.P. NEWS CNBC 2200 FLETCHER AVE FORT LEE, NJ 07024 Thanks. td

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (6373)	8/14/2000 12:31:39 AM
From: WTMHouston	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17683

Haim: Surely you jest. CNBC (or any other news entity) reporting the numbers the way they are released and the characterization of those numbers in the manner in which most major followers of the company have characterized the numbers is far from "promoting" the stock. Had CNBC "investigated" the numbers and reported them with your perspective, they would have been accused of attempting to make news, rather than just reporting it. I doubt that most at CNBC look as closely at the underlying numbers and their potential meaning (at least for reporting purposes) as almost anyone investing in or closely following a company; nor should they. In this case, the company reported the numbers in a positive light and it appears that most major analysts took the same view. I suspect that if some major analyst publicly shared your views about CSCO's numbers, CNBC would likely report that as well because it would then be news. If you are right about CSCO's "real" performance, then you should short the heck out of it. If the numbers are actually as you view them, then most analysts will see it that way as well and will start selling long before they release anything publicly. That said, the small drop post-earnings means nothing so far. Almost every tech company (or at least a large percentage of them) reporting earnings this Q has seen the same kind of sell off, if not worse. You unfairly place CNBC and TD is a catch 22 position. If they report it the way it is released and discussed by the majority, they incur your wrath for not investigating the alleged truth. If they report your version of the truth, they incur the wrath of those who will accuse them of making news rather than just reporting it. It is a no win situation -- at least as far as pleasing everyone is concerned (which is itself impossible to begin with). Based on how I view the line-up at CNBC, it seems to me that you should direct your concerns about the alleged truth of CSCO's numbers to those folks that tend to report such things; i.e., the folks on Squawk Box, who tend to do more in the analysis department. But, if you expect to have anyone even consider listening to you, I would think that the best course is to approach it with "Hey, here is another view of CSCO's numbers that you may want to investigate" rather than "How can you be so irresponsible as to have lied when you reported CSCO's earnings." Just my thoughts. Troy PS -- regarding; <<Kindly tell us how CNBC will handle the matter or should those hurt by CNBC rosy statements sue, GE, it's Chairman Jack Welsh personally and even CNBC staff for that?>> Aside from being frivolous, or perhaps because of, such comments ruin any realistic chance that most will even think about considering your views seriously. In short, such comments make you sound looney (i.e., they provide a facial reason for believing that you have no idea what you are talking about), even if you are 100% right about the underlying merits of CSCO's numbers.