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: rich evans who wrote (9860)	12/20/2000 11:11:27 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 12823

Rich, Good overview of optical networks status by Judith Williams on Gorilla thread Ummm, Rich, I'm trying to bite my tongue, but it's really hard. Ryan, Hankin, Kent <http://www.rhk.com/> is not an "optics research boutique". No matter how nice that sounds to the press release queen who wrote those words. It is an industry sponsored promotions company. Let's get that straight from the git go. Existing networks have been cobbled together Rube Goldberg fashion While this is true to an extent, the authors implication that things will be different in the future is completely disingenuous. We'll simply be adding another layer on the cake next time around. It all connects to the PSTN eventually. Level (3) used this same pie in the sky blarney 2 1/2 years ago and finally admitted that, yup, this stuff is difficult and we need a "softswitch" in order to play in the real world. With demand for traffic doubling every 90 days, Ahem, this is the Rush Limbaugh approach to the truth. Just shade things a little bit more than they have been before. The industry "gold standard" for how many bits are flying is a 100% gain every 100 days. So, this bimbo just shaded the estimate by 10% for effect. But that doesn't even come close to the whopper that this is revealed to be in the next paragraph. Where the post states that in 1999 internet traffic grew by 300% OK, so let's do some math. If demand for traffic is growing at 100% every 90 days, as is stated in the first paragraph, then in 4x90 days, traffic should have grown to 200% in 90 days, 400% in 180 days, 800% in 270 days and 1,600% in 360 days. Hmmm, paragraph 1 says 1,600%, paragraph 2 says 300%. Which is it? I don't know. I can't wait to review the rest of this article.... I had to skip ahead to the last sentence to control my laughter. But that was a topper: As DWDM systems progress from low- to high-channel count, traffic management functions become mission-critical and make coordination between JDSU and, say, a Sycamore or Juniper imperative as well as a way to generate network effects. Just what the ______ is a "network effect"??? It doesn't sound anything like revenue, profit, operating income or cash flow to me. It sounds more like the hubris of the dot.bombs, who sold their sizzle based on ROV.... Huh? Return on Vision... as if.... Not impressed, Ray :)