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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pat mudge who wrote (13537)	10/26/2000 7:46:08 PM
From: stomper	Respond to of 24042

Saw Strauss on CNN w/Willow Bay little while ago. She asked him: "So your saying if a Nortel lags in ordering equipment from JDSU that it doesn't matter because you have any number of customers who will immediately take delivery?" Strauss kind of chuckled under his breath and said "Uh, yes, most definitely" -dave

To: pat mudge who wrote (13537)	10/26/2000 7:50:38 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24042

Briefing.com comes out with some great reports, but this isn't one. Pat, boy I don't know about that. I always have thought they are very light in technology knowledge. Tony

To: pat mudge who wrote (13537)	10/26/2000 8:13:11 PM
From: John Waddell, Ph.D	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24042

Pat, I really enjoy your posts. You have given the best answer I've seen as to why JDSU doesn't have to slow down. I see one additional problem right now, especially if we get a negative GDP number tomorrow. JDSU sports a P/E of around 100, and I'm not sure this market is willing to support such high P/Es during a slowdown. When things pick up, investors will sort through those high-flyers, like JDSU, that can keep growing, vs. those that can't. In the short-term, however, they are likely to throw out the babies with the bathwater. Thus, I believe you are right, but I think Briefing.com and similar voices are also raising realistic concerns for short to medium term investors. Again, thanks for your informative post. John Waddell

To: pat mudge who wrote (13537)	10/26/2000 11:08:45 PM
From: gbh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24042

Based on what was said by Lucent and Nortel, there will be a marked slowdown in circuit-switch-based spending and increased spending in IP-based systems. So even if over-all spending eases, the part that matters to JDSU and SDLI will expand. Hi Pat, I think your statement may be a bit of a stretch. Does it really matter what NT or LU say? How about what the carriers are saying? WCOM, Williams, T, and FON are all saying the same thing. Cap-ex will be slowing next year. Those are 4 big names all speaking in unison. And that goes along with all the CLECs who may not just be slowing, but reallllllly slowing. Circuit-switched gear has been slowing for a year. Hence, the lingering LU problems. I think what all the carriers are saying is just what they are saying, cap-ex will be slowing. I don't think any of them explicitly stated that IP and optical will be excluded from the slowdown. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I don't think so. Quite the opposite. Being a components' maker makes these guys forward indicators as their products are designed into systems long before they're put in the field. This wouldn't even be true if by chance the equipment makers (NT, CCO, ALA, etc) were J-I-T manufacturers of this gear. On the contrary, this gear has quite long lead times to build and test. Hence the very large inventories required by the likes of NT. Hence the necessity to have continued buying components past the point of a slight glut in the build/test/sell/install cycle. The component guys are very much lagging indicators. Gary

To: pat mudge who wrote (13537)	10/28/2000 12:42:14 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24042

This article has all the markings of someone in a highly-leveraged short position who stands to lose his hide in the buying panic that's already begun. Actually, pat, Greg Jones--the author--has regularly been an intelligent commentator on tech trends in general and the optical sector in particular. He's written their "Photonics Revolution" series, for example. He does technology and fundamental analysis, not TA or other stuff, and I doubt he's motivated here by anything other than his sincere opinions. Don't know if it's been posted yet, but here was his response today to comments like yours: 11:02 ET ****** Optical Lowdown : We received more than a few emails about yesterday's JDSU comments, accusing us of shorting optical stocks, thinking the sector is going to hell, and so on. It's time to set the record straight. If there is one lesson that every investor should have learned this year, it's this: valuations matter. The optical business is booming and will be booming for years to come. Telecommunications service providers must adopt optical technologies or they will not be able to compete. But strong growth in optical networking sales does not mean that optical stocks are a good buy at any price. The stock pages are littered with great businesses that have seen horrendous stock price declines this year. It's not enough to have a great business; the business has to be sufficiently great to justify the price. That's what we have questioned with the optical sector. As was the case early in the dot-com bubble, investors have been making the mistake of believing that the worst case scenario is the current consensus, and that no competition exists outside of the current crop of publicly traded companies. Both are false. Capital expenditure growth at service providers will almost certainly be less robust in 2001. While the numbers might still be strong and growth will quite likely be focussed on optical gear, this still represents a change on the margin. Growth in spending, even on optical gear, will probably not be as good as had been expected. And competition is much more intense than widely believed. That venture cap money that used to fund dot-coms is now flooding optical start-ups. The line of opticals-in-waiting grows larger as a quick look at the IPO backlog indicates. When you are dealing with a sector whose valuations are extraordinary -- P/E and even some P/S ratios in the hundreds, any unexpected change in demand and/or competition can have an outsized impact on valuation. That is what we have seen in recent weeks -- a valuation reassessment. Now, back to JDSU's report. Was it good? Absolutely. But does that change the fact that concerns about demand and competition are now out there? Absolutely not. The Pandora's box has been opened. The JDSU report was good, and that is better than being bad. But as we noted yesterday, the demand slowdown is not expected until next year, and component makers will be the last to see it, so JDSU's past is not necessarily the optical sector's future. These stocks offer great long-term potential, but only at the right price. We are much closer to that price than we were a few weeks ago, but we're probably not there yet. - Greg Jones, Briefing.com tekboy@notallskepticsareshorts.com