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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mehitabel who wrote (39933)	9/15/2000 6:54:48 PM
From: shoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

I think that if people want to be afraid, they will find something wrong with a company no matter how good it is. Look at AMAT's drop: absolutely no reason for it. The thing we have to do now, as investors, is figure out how afraid people want to be. They will surely hammer Cisco if they're scared enough. It's not rational. So how much do Cisco puts cost right now? Regards, a lurking long

To: Mehitabel who wrote (39933)	9/15/2000 9:14:29 PM
From: pat mudge	Respond to of 77400

That's all anyone can do, I think, but I would certainly welcome any comments you might have on this sort of article. I've found in past situations an article like this encourages investors to take a sharp look at their holdings and through the process of healthy give-and-take see their companies more clearly. We all come out better in the end. I posted the article at the request of someone who was having trouble accessing SI yesterday. I normally don't follow CSCO other than listening to their conference calls for clues to the over-all networking sector. Looking at Cisco's stock history, I do wonder what will cause it to return to the glory days. 5-year: quicken.com 3-year: quicken.com 1-year: quicken.com YTD: quicken.com Pat

To: Mehitabel who wrote (39933)	9/15/2000 9:30:17 PM
From: Tulvio Durand	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

... There certainly is no hint or whiff of problems there that I have seen. CSCO results have been too strong over the past two quarters, and accelerating! to let that sort of thing affect any decisions ... One thing that bothers me about last Q results -- 40% of earnings came from non-core business as in "earnings from other investments". This unusually large percentage, from about 10% or so in prior Q's is, to me, cause for alarm. How do you (or anyone) rationalize CSCO's dependency on 40% earnings from non-core business to continue beating earnings estimates by a penny? Tulvio