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: Jay Couch who wrote (49620)	3/6/2001 5:53:36 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

Oh really? First off, the word is gimmickery. Second, I'm not sure if THAT is even a word. Third, EVERY company is made up of selfish buggers. And fourth, the company is selling over $20 billion worth of product a year. How in the world can you say that it's not a 'good' company? Let's put aside semantics for a moment. Cisco has retained earnings of about 7 billion. That is, for everything they've done throughout their life, their operations have accrued about 7 billion. Exxon last year paid dividends of about 5.8 billion. That is, the amount Exxon pays in dividends on a yearly basis is almost equal to what Cisco has earned from its operations in its entire operating history. So, back to word games, I consider Exxon to be a cash cow, and compared to Exxon, I consider Cisco to be a little ant. It is truly a mark of how preposterous the bubble was that the market valued the ant higher than the cow at one point.

To: Jay Couch who wrote (49620)	3/6/2001 6:11:29 PM
From: SouthFloridaGuy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

Jay, That being said, I would be more than happy to send you a case of beer... (Telecomguy, too). Just PM me to let me know where to send it. I have attempted to stop drinking; I find it's a complete waste of money and it ruins my following day, so no need for beer. I don't know how you can say CSCO will hit $12. I think all the bad news is already priced into the stock. The Nasdaq could possibly hit 1500, but why would you say that a 25% decline in the overall market would cause more than a 25% decline in one of the Naz's Bellweathers? Don't understand that logic. Now that's screwed up logic. You're making a helluva lot of assumptions on the relative value of CSCO versus the entire Nasdaq. The bears have stated for over a year now that CSCO was overvalued by any metric, including in a comparison of the Nasdaq. Anyway, even using your convoluted logic, at today's close CSCO has fallen 70% and the Nasdaq has fallen 57% from the highs. That gives it a Beta of 1.22. Given about a 33% further fall in the Nasdaq on my prediction, one could predict CSCO at 24 * (33% * 1.22) = 14.40. That's a lot closer to my prediction of $12 than anything you were saying. So by your logic, you are telling me that if the Nasdaq can go to 1500, which you state is possible, CSCO should go to $15 since it effectively follows the Nasdaq. Oh really? First off, the word is gimmickery. Second, I'm not sure if THAT is even a word. Third, EVERY company is made up of selfish buggers. And fourth, the company is selling over $20 billion worth of product a year. How in the world can you say that it's not a 'good' company? I know that the word is gimmickery, it was a typo, I was in a hurry. Sorry for not correcting my posts, but I do have a life. For the rest of your answer, please look at Mucho Mass' response about Exxon Mobil. No offense, but $20 billion of product and a $175 billion valuation? No way, Jose.