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: Helios who wrote (45269)	12/21/2000 8:33:09 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 77400

There is some truth in what you say. It is too soon in the game to be sure however. Bush isnt president yet and this landing was designed by Greenspan during Clintons watch. I suspect if Bush was talking up the economy the markets would not be in a much different place. What we need now is a clear interest rate cut, preferable 1/2 point and preferably in early january. Other than a relief rally that may last for a couple of weeks, we probably will go down further.

To: Helios who wrote (45269)	12/21/2000 8:47:29 AM
From: kvkkc1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

ot: This is all clinton. Bush hasn't done a thing, but the media and blokes like you worship clinton and are unwilling to admit he's been a failure in every way possible for the country. Greenspan has been his willing accomplice. Ruining what could have been the greatest growth of wealth in our country's history by looking for inflation that was never there. They can't stand to see small investors have success. By the way, Reagan's tax cuts were the impetus behind the economic expansion of the last 20 years. The Bush Sr. and clinton tax cuts took time to work thru the economy along with Greenspan.knc

To: Helios who wrote (45269)	12/21/2000 9:14:10 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

Ok thread, this is getting silly. This isn't a Bush thing. Have a cigar! This thing is stock by stock by stock, and CSCO is entirely representative. Here we have a stock where people look back with pride on purchasing it at $0.70, six years ago. Six months ago trading at $70. Yesterday trading at $35. These are (approximate) facts. Let's put the company facts up for comparison. 1994 earnings 0.3 B$ on revenues of 1.3 B$. 2000 earnings 2.7 B$ on revenues of 19 B$. So in the time that the stock has zoomed up 100x (and then down to 50x), the company has grown tenfold. Whoops. Something is not right with this picture!!! Now, let's get my bias perfectly clear. I am posting as one who might be considering buying the stock. That pool of people that CSCO shareholders need to be in a happy buying mood in order to get profit. Whether I am a moron or not, a fool or not, long or not, bull or not is immaterial. What counts is that I have (a) enough money to take your paper off of your hands, and (b) desire to do so at the price you're willing to take. I read posts from PMS Witch & the hearty "hear hear" from Ed saying, in effect, we're still smart even if we sell at half the price because we get a big profit. Makes me think twice. By similar logic, they're still smart if it drops to $17.5 I am not inclined to be so silly as to take my hard earned money, transfer my wealth to PW's pocket, and then be stuck with the bag being the guy who has to find some schmuck to take it off my hands. Not when it appears that this schmuck could take it off Ed's hands for $17.5 and leave him with profit he feels smart taking. Ok, maybe not Ed. Maybe sam or joe or mary or any number of holders of a few billion shares who profit no matter if it drops to a tenth from here. I posted this perspective back in the summer and (a) used it to protect my capital, and (b) earned the designation "Thread Moron". C'est la vie. I still maintain this perspective. Me and quite a few million other people right now. That's the reason CSCO is dangerous right now. John.

To: Helios who wrote (45269)	12/21/2000 9:16:20 AM
From: Monty Lenard	Respond to of 77400

Well I have heard it all now. If that is not the most ridiculous statement I haven't heard it yet. Get a life! You sound like Frank Ellis Morris. Monty

To: Helios who wrote (45269)	12/21/2000 9:45:45 AM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 77400

OH MY GOD! You are naive. Please stop trying to set the stage for blaming Bush for the downturn in the economy. If anyone understands free markets and the economy, it's Bush and his team. These guys are businessmen. The guy he just appointed to the Commerce cabinet position just broke the last record for fund raising by 3 fold. Good fund raisers generally are folks who have good ties with business and have played CEO roles before. The economy is tanking for so many reasons right now, it would be just stupid to blame one person. Let me help you delineate the problems: * irrationality of the market's previous highs; current return to sanity * too many rate hikes by Greenspan in reaction to the market, rather than sticking to JUST fighting inflation; and then, subsequently, too slow of a reaction by Greenspan to lower rates to fight a looming recession * instability of oil prices * high dollar necessitating delicate balance for orderly reduction in the dollar's value * recession/depression in Japan; looming problems in Europe * overspending by Service Providers in the telecom market; subsequent, cash/credit crunch in addition to lower profits due to overforecasting demand for those services These are just some of the problems we are facing. Bush is inheriting these problems and he has a plan to fight them. My biggest concern is old Alan's inability to move quickly and adapt to changing times and markets. He needs to stick to one thing, fighting inflation and fighting recession and stop worrying about which way the market is heading.