To: GVTucker who wrote (161291 ) 9/29/2000 12:31:54 PM From: D.J.Smyth Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 176387 GVTucker, re revenue missNote, however, that DELL missed on revenues last quarter even though management stated that sales were fine. (Heck, if you'll recall, kemble's favorite word was used, "Robust".) They missed on revenues for 2 quarters last year. Dell didn't miss on revenue, the ANALYSTS missed on their projections. Dell stated 40% growth last year. they achieved that. They stated early this year 30% growth overall. They didn't say "30% qtr. over qtr" comparison. How can you invent a 'revnue miss' when Dell achieved it's growth goals? I don't know in what context Kembell was using the word "robust". But, in this market ANY sustainable growth in excess of 25% per annum is substantial. What idiot wouldn't buy a company that is growing in excess of 25% in this market? Their NOW saying that they're NOT looking at THIS year, but NEXT! The goofs were saying the same in 1998 and 1999. They were looking at 1998, but 1999 in 1998. They were not looking at 1999 but 2000, in 1999. They're not looking at 2000, but 2001 in 2000. Dell is already priced for a below a lousy 25% growth in 2000.Have you calculated the number of years it will take SUNW to catch up with Dell in revenue with Dell growth at even 25% and SUNW sustaining a growth at 40%? SIX YEARS! So you mean to tell me that you're willing to buy SUNW with 2X the market cap of Dell who is experiencing 40% growth and AND WAIT SIX YEARS for your 40% growth to equal the same Dell revenue of $110 billion achieved with 25% growth? there is clearly something wrong with WallStreets justification of stock pricing. Dell's sales remain fine