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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: techtonicbull who wrote (39126)	12/13/2000 1:09:20 PM
From: Charles Tutt	Respond to of 64865

Here are the two reports I assume you mean: biz.yahoo.com biz.yahoo.com IBM says its growth in midrange systems outpaces Sun. Perhaps it does, by the metric they've chosen -- percent increase in their respective revenue shares. I.e., (although I haven't seen the IDC report) piecing together figures from the two reports it looks like IBM increased from a revenue share of about 13.5% to about 23%, or about 71% (I don't know how to explain that this increase is 9.5% of total revenue compared to the 8 "share" points they cite, but I'm guessing that the difference is that "share point gain" doesn't explicitly refer to revenues, so could be system count). At the same time, it looks like Sun increased its revenue share from about 19.3% to 27%, or about 40% (about 7.7% of total revenue -- if "share point gain" refers to system count, as I'm guessing, that would mean Sun increased revenue almost as much but with fewer systems, so that the the Sun systems must be higher priced on average). The rest of the world (HP, CPQ, etc.) must have seen decreased shares for the total to remain at 100%. Does that make sense? Perhaps rudedog will interject with the actual report numbers. JMHO. Charles Tutt (TM)