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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (8130)	8/22/2000 9:19:14 AM
From: Boplicity	Respond to of 12823

thanks Mike <eom> G

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (8130)	8/24/2000 11:37:58 AM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Re: Optical Infrastructure Spending - What's Wrong with this Picture? Thread- At the risk of sounding foolish and heretical, if you add up the market cap of a few key players (not even counting the substantial caps of larger players with optical divisions-- NT, LU, ALA, CSCO, etc.), it probably results in a overall market cap of the optical players exceeding the ENTIRE 2004 projected total available market(TAM) for their products by about a factor of at at least ten-fold. Probably closer to twenty-fold since I'm sure I left out a lot of pure optical companies. Market Caps: JDSU $96 billion CIEN $28 billion CORV $29 billion JNPR $59 billion SCMR $39 billion ---------------- Total $251 billion Since the TAM in 2004 is estimated to be only $38 billion, does this strike anyone as odd? I don't understand why the legacy players with real, here and now, revenues and products don't nearly approach the valuations of the purely optical players. The only thing I can figure is the investors in these pure optical plays must believe the estimates below are WAAAY off. Maybe they are right? I don't follow the pure optical equipment market much. Or do they make so much money as to allow them to afford such large valuations? Is the report below leaving out some important products in the optical equipment space? Or is the ROW(rest of world) market more than double what will be spent in North America? But even if the ROW was double North America, that still leave the caps about 10 times 2004 TAM projections. Maybe that's considered reasonable? Like I said, I have no idea what drives valuations in the pure optical space and was just wondering if I'm missing something big? I must be because I see a lot of big money managers on CNBC pushing all of the above, all the time.<g> -MikeM(From Florida) *********************** Optical Networks: Metro and Long Haul Forecasts The North American market for optical networks is set to grow at a rate of about 29 percent yearly, totalling $38 billion in 2004**. And the highest growth will show in sales of long-haul equipment, according to "Optical Edge Networks," a recent report from Pioneer Consulting. According to the report, revenues from long-haul DWDM gear, Sonet equipment, and optical switches will grow 32 percent yearly over the next four years -- driven by ongoing buildouts by existing carriers, as well as the installation of wholesale fiber networks by new providers. Metropolitan networks also are on the rise, Pioneer says, albeit on a slightly smaller scale and with slightly less costly optical gear. Sales of metro gear are expected to grow at a rate of 25 percent annually. Revenue for metro gear will come chiefly from new Sonet-based equipment that enables carriers to continue to use existing TDM and data networks, using the earnings from those services to fund and create new IP services, Pioneer says.