SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Uncle Frank who wrote (39394)8/11/2000 9:19:40 PM
From: bambs  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 77397
 
Uncle Frank, why don't you take the time to read your post and think about how you would feel the thread were all bears and someone posted a comment like that about you. I think you must be blind to your own arrogance. When I arrived on this thread I was brushed off and abused by you "old time longs". I don't care if you have 100 times your original investment on CSCO. I came on to call it a better short then a long at $70. Since then it has failed to hold $70 three times and fell $15, $20 and then $8 this week.
I am bearish on the market. I have researched my opinion. I am here to discuss CSCO and the market as CSCO is a bell weather for the NAS.

You say I can't add anything original...I think you are crazy...The longs add little to the thread if you ask me. Earnings come out and all you talk about is the pro-forma numbers like CNBC and the analysts. What have you ever added to the thread? You so up and act so cocky because you have owned CSCO since it was $1. I think you bunch try to influence others to buy CSCO so you can continue to prosper. I don't think that you all are completely honest with the thread. When will you understand that it doesn't matter to me or anyone else if you got your CSCO shares for Christmas or paid 2 cents. Let's talk about the long term future of the stock. Let's talk about the next 2 years in the market!

The fact that I influenced my parents to get out of what I believe to be a risky market is my own business. My parents are retired...They have their house paid off. They have a good amount of money to work with...They have done very well over the last 5 years. If they just get 7% for the rest of their lives they will have no needs in the world. But, a 30-50% pull back in the market over the next few years will hurt them. Sometimes you need to play it safe.

You have always been so insulting to me and all bears. You use words like "parrots classic bearspeak", "newcomer to investing", "naive", "ludicrous"...etc..etc...etc.
You go on to no end about how you and other longs have been in CSCO and have "realized 6 and 7 digit returns". Well good for you!!!

How dare you call me egotistical when you are the "ego" king of the thread. The text that you and Ed Forrest post on this thread nothing but bragging of your massive returns and your old boy investing experience... you assume that you know more about the markets then anyone...you don't know me or anything about me....I am a little daytrader...but I went to University for 6 years. I was a Microsoft Engineer for 5 and Cisco Engineer for 2. I was senior systems administrator and project manager for 8 years. My last computer contract was at a major investment banking firm, where I upgraded the trading floor to Windows NT and spent countless hours observing market makers in action. (this is when I decided to become a full time trader...to "play the game") I have read most of the classic books on investing, daytrading, understanding market makers and historical information about markets. I have followed the market since I was a teenager and I have been a full time daytrader for almost 2 year. Since that time I have averaged a monthly return of 10%.

But, unlike you I am more then willing to admit when I am wrong. I know full well that if the public buys the market goes up and that is all that matters. If wall street can sell the stock and push the market up they will...that's how they make money! Dow 15000 Nasdaq 6000 what ever. I just look at the risk to reward, day to day. week to week, month to month, year to year and trade.

When I look at CSCO I see a big P/E, but great growth. I see acquisitions that are result in growth but massive dilution and because of pooling, a miss representation of earnings. I see 344 million in gains from investments and only 796 million in "actual income" (makes up 43% of actual earnings) Actual earings growth of only 30%. I see a bubble market that I think will turn gains from investments into losses from investments. (mark to market gains go quickly)

I see CNBC talk about summer rallies, election rallies, fall rallies, every week it seems like they are hyping some kind of rally coming. Finally, I see a bunch of arrogant bulls on this thread that don't seem to want to talk about the points I raise. I see people like you that instead talk of $100 price targets and post to attack me. You try to belittle me by calling me a novice investor, a TM, accuse me of being some other poster from years gone by that was a bear and always wrong, etc, etc, etc. I don't care where you go post but I hope you know that if you come here and post your $100 pump and dump targets I will be here to discuss the other side.

As for me being ORIGINAL???? Check yourself! Look in the mirror! Your posts come across to me as the most arrogant, unoriginal and boring that I have ever read on any thread. It was you and Ed Forrest that made me want to hang around on this thread to take on you arrogance when you told me to "crawl back in your hole". At least Gary will talk numbers and look at financials. (he does stick to the pro-forma side of things and discount the real acquisition and stock option costs though)

Finally, in the next two years if CSCO proves to be dead money and the Nasdaq hits 2500...I would like you to admit how wrong you are. I would like you to post on this thread that I was right and you were wrong. I still say that after the slide to 2500 if things get real ugly as the economy slow from the wealth effect turning into a broke effect, the Nasdaq will test 1500...I level that we were at in 1998 not that long ago! It may seem unreal to many bulls but it was just 2 years ago! Most importantly I want you to come on this thread and tell everyone that you regret your arrogance and your bad investment advice that cost them so dearly. No everyone is rich like you...some people are counting on stocks like CSCO to retire...they will be hurt in the long run, in my opinion.

Have a good weekend all,

Bambs

P.S. I hope you take the time to read this post carefully and think about the way you come across for a change...instead of always pointing a finger, look in the mirror



To: Uncle Frank who wrote (39394)8/11/2000 11:27:45 PM
From: ms.smartest.person  Respond to of 77397
 
Wow! This looks like RB or Yahoo! Cisco Watch: Are the brains draining?

After Don Listwin left Cisco Systems (Nasdaq: CSCO) to become CEO of the newly-merging Phone.com and Software.com, we have to wonder if an executive exodus has begun at the giant networking company.

Compared to, say, the executive exodus at Microsoft over the past year or so, the Cisco leavings are just a trickle -- in fact, the only truly high-profile departures this year are those of Mr. Listwin and Judy Estrin. Ms. Estrin, formerly Cisco's chief technology officer, left the company in April and is now heading her own technology research/development firm, Packet Design.

While the departures aren't yet a trend (everyone knows it takes three similar events to make a trend), are the high-level bailouts a sign that there's no end in sight to the reign of current CEO John Chambers? To get a take on the idea, Cisco Watch turned to its esteemed panel of underground Cisco-watchers, who were all granted anonymity in exchange for their thoughts:

1. There is no true heir apparent to John Chambers.
Though it proved handy for reporters to call Mr. Listwin "Cisco's No. 2 executive" and the "heir apparent," in fact he was one of two holding the executive VP title -- the other being Gary Daichendt, EVP for worldwide operations. "Cisco's not like Sun, where Scott McNealy has clearly identified Ed Zander as the No. 2 guy," our informers noted.

2. Mr. Chambers, only 50, isn't leaving anytime soon, so anyone on Cisco's executive team who wants to be a CEO should start looking.
"He [Chambers] keeps saying he's going to be around for five years," one informer said, guessing that Mr. Chambers's stay is somewhat more open-ended. "It's not surprising to a lot of people that Don [Listwin] left."

3. Successful companies like Cisco are happy hunting-grounds for recruiters.
"Large companies with momentum are where [recruiters] look for CEOs," one person said. "The trick with Cisco is to keep the bench strength high. That's why it's better sometimes to not have a clear No. 2."

4. Who's next? Instead of asking our panel, we'll take a shot at guessing ourselves, since this item is pure conjecture. Someone whose name is probably on a lot of recruiters' speed-dials is Senior VP Pete Solvik, the company's CIO. Mr. Solvik is already a board member of several technology companies, including Asera, a Vinod Khosla-backed Internet business services startup. Another candidate is Kevin DeNuccio, senior VP in the all-important worldwide service provider operations space. Mr. DeNuccio recently invested in and became a board member of startup MyNetSales.com, signaling entrepreneurial interest, at the very least. Our trend-spotters are standing by.

KEVIN WHO?
Muted by Mr. Listwin's job change was news of Redback Networks (Nasdaq: RBAK)'s appointment of Cisco veteran Kevin Q. Smith as senior vice president of operations. A statement from Redback so effusively praises Mr. Smith's credentials that one would think he, too, was an heir apparent to Mr. Chambers.

But, as one source at Cisco put it, "Kevin who?"

Well, Mr. Smith was "senior director of manufacturing and plant manager of high-end and optical systems manufacturing at Cisco Systems," according to the Redback statement. That makes him sound like an optical networking veteran. But Redback didn't hire away one of Cisco's optical networking veterans, because Cisco didn't have an optical strategy on paper until late last year.

So what did he do? He led Cisco's operations and distribution. Or, as the Redback statement notes: "he was responsible for shipping billions of dollars in revenue output, including nearly 33 percent of the company's revenue output in the last year."

The statement gives the impression that had Mr. Smith called in sick for a week or so, Cisco's revenues would drop by two-thirds. That probably wasn't the case. But Mr. Smith should be able to help Redback get a handle on its outsourced manufacturing operations around the world.

With growth like Redback has seen lately, Mr. Smith was probably a wise hire. But despite the hyperbole surrounding his arrival at Redback, we think Cisco will live to see another day.

CARL AND THE COMPONENTS
The most recent Cisco earnings conference call prompted another question: what the heck is up with Monterey's wavelength router, anyway?

Cisco wanted the product to be shipping during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2000, but it is now slated to move during the first fiscal quarter of 2001. Cisco boss John Chambers blamed the delay on the industry-wide shortage of optical components.

But just last week, Carl Russo, Cisco's group VP for optical networking, said that the Monterey product had taken longer than expected because Cisco changed the engineering deadlines to allow for better quality control. In fact, Mr. Russo blamed himself for having informed customers of the delay without telling anyone else.

The Monterey unit, based in Richardson, Texas, is also tangled with Alcatel in a lawsuit. But Cisco officials have repeatedly said that legal matters haven't interfered with their product plans.

Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? No. Cisco's optical group was formed with a mountain of cash and, thus far, they've had a molehill of results to show for it. Whether delays are caused by communication failure, missing bits and pieces, or a little of both, there is tremendous pressure on that group to come up with something that wows the market as much as the Cerent product Cisco acquired at the same time.

For that reason we'll keep you informed on its developments and, if need be, its delays.

Also, with apologies to Miami Herald columnist Dave Barry, we could not help but observe while assessing this information that "Carl and the Components" would be a great name for a rock band. (Of course, Cerent -- the optical networking company Cisco bought to snare Mr. Russo, among others -- already has a history of musical talent; for a sample, point your browser to UBIK and click the "Creetonz Corner.")

If you have any ideas for what to call a Cisco-based bunch of rockers, let us know at ciscowatch@redherring.com.

You can find this article at: redherring.com



To: Uncle Frank who wrote (39394)8/11/2000 11:46:28 PM
From: Eski  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 77397
 
Yeah UF and if CSCO were in the 70's now, you would be all over Bambs like flies on s@it, you're no different then Bamb or anyone here in SI. How Childish a Moderated Thread where the little longs can whisper sweet CSCO things to each other. You sound just as sick as V-Man and his so-call angles misleading people down the yellow brick road, trying to pump RMBS and other stocks, what a joke. Reminds me of TokyoMex. Maybe the SEC should look into it. You guys are joke. Nasdaq 5000 a pipe dream this year. Those days are over.