SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : SDLI - JDSU transition -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rmooney who wrote (1196)4/15/2001 11:54:40 AM
From: pat mudge  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 3294
 
LATimes's Business Editor James Flanigan mentions JDSU in today's edition:

Sunday, April 15, 2001

Despite the Lean Times, Tech Firms Still Investing in the Future

By JAMES FLANIGAN

The most devastating decline in technology stocks in decades isn't stopping tech companies from investing in the future.

Intel is increasing expenditures for plants, equipment, research and development this year, despite a poor year for earnings. The big semiconductor company is following a dictum of its co-founder, Gordon Moore, that "you must spend your way out of an economic downturn because you don't get healthy on old products."

JDS Uniphase--a much smaller company, but the world's No. 1 producer of light-wave, or optical, components for Internet networks--is also increasing spending this year. JDS is doing so to keep up with demand for its products, which continues strong despite a famine of orders in most areas of technology.

Experts in Silicon Valley do not deny the economic slowdown. On the contrary, most see a troubled 12 to 15 months ahead for companies in electronics, computers and Internet-related businesses.

But having experienced bad times before, veteran venture capitalists take the long view.

"Although stock market indexes are dropping to ankle level, there is little reason for gloom about the long-term prospects of U.S. technology firms. Progress has not stopped. Invention has not ceased," says Michael Moritz, partner in Sequoia Capital, a venture firm in Menlo Park.

"Technology marches ahead. It has no clue whether we're in a bull or bear market," says Andy Kessler, head of Velocity Capital Management, a Palo Alto investment firm.

In the newer technology industries, whatever is happening today has happened before. Loud predictions of "the end of Silicon Valley" and questions about the value of technology companies have accompanied previous downturns. Prominent companies have faded as new stars have emerged.

It is a world in flux, and that is why stock prices are so volatile. But there are steadier underlying trends in which, even today, venture capital firms continue to fund small companies and real advances continue to be made.

The creation of a new Internet communications structure goes forward at a rapid pace, with scores of companies developing optical components and systems to send information via light waves, or photons, rather than electrons, which are slower The problem is that the long-distance or city-to-city Internet has been built before local Internet connections are in place and functioning. So progress is at a pause.

"The optics business has slowed to a 30% annual growth rate from a 100% annual rate for the last four years," says James Jungjohann, an investment banker with CIBC World Markets.

Consequently, technology's next steps are obvious, entrepreneurs and financiers say: Devices and processes to connect the Internet to homes and offices. New uses for the Internet will develop as those "last-mile" connections are made.

Wireless is emerging as a solution. A new telecommunications standard called 802.11b, which facilitates wireless Internet connections to homes and offices, is helping users bypass telephone companies, reports Bharat Sastri, founder of HelloBrain.com, an online technological information exchange. The phone companies have been slow to bring reasonably priced broadband Internet service to their customers.

Products are already on the market. Agere Systems, a new company partially spun off in March by Lucent Technologies, makes circuitry and antennas based on the 802.11b standard and is shipping them in volume.

Lucent, itself a result of the spinoff of Western Electric from AT&T, is undergoing a massive reorganization after falling behind competitors in product development, incurring losses and large debt burdens. Lucent didn't skimp on research investment, analysts say, but Internet products it chose to develop proved less successful than those of competitors Nortel Networks and Cisco Systems.

But that's the way it is in these downturns.

"The deck gets reshuffled in every downturn. Successful companies are preparing now to gain position in the next upturn," observes Floyd Kvamme, a partner in Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, a venture firm in Palo Alto.

Intel is doing just such preparation. Coming off a year in which the electronics leader suffered delays and disappointments in product development, with earnings falling and the stock price down 63% from its all-time high, Intel is stepping up investment because it needs to change.

The company's microprocessors--"Intel Inside"--dominate the personal computer field. But computing is shifting to mobile phones, hand-held computers and Internet communications. Intel is developing optical switches and other products geared to the Internet, but hasn't been able to bring them out yet.

Its investments and efforts to change stem from having been there before. Intel saw U.S. firms cut back on investment in the downturn of the 1970s and lose the market for memory chips to Japanese competitors. Intel itself almost went under in 1982 and was saved only by an equity investment by IBM.

Now Intel is strong--almost $34 billion a year in revenue and $14 billion in cash assets. But it is trying to reform while it can, not sitting on past glory.

Young JDS Uniphase is investing because it must try to stay ahead of the competition in a fast-moving field.

The lesson is that technology goes through cycles and the victors in one era can lose in the next.

Radio Corp. of America, or RCA, was the driving force of radio and then television, but failed to make a transition to electronic computing and communications and lost its independence. Motorola did make that transition and became a global power in communications and electronics.

Other lessons include the fact that technology takes a long time to become fully commercial.

Regis McKenna, whose marketing innovations brought Silicon Valley firms to national attention, points out that it took decades from the invention of the transistor in 1947 at Bell Labs to Intel's microprocessor powering personal computers.

And it took 25 years from the Defense Department's development of the Internet in 1969 to the founding of Netscape Communications with its Web browser in 1994. The Internet still is far from commercially developed.

Longevity is no guarantee of survival, but adaptability can be. Xerox never successfully adapted to changes in information technology and is now an endangered company, harried by competition and burdened by huge debts.

IBM, by contrast, started out behind in the computer industry after World War II, but invested steadily. By the 1960s, it swept away competition from Burroughs, General Electric, RCA, Honeywell and others.

Then IBM adapted to the age of the personal computer and when it lost ground to changing technology there, it changed again to emphasize computing and Internet services. It remains today a successful global company and a technology leader.

"Very few companies can last two or three cycles, much less a century," notes William Davidow of Mohr, Davidow Ventures of Menlo Park.

Finally, predictions about technology are hazardous. In the recession of 1919, after World War I, Forbes magazine asked on its cover whether the market for automobiles, then a craze momentarily cooling in sales, had reached saturation point.

Products and trends to watch for in the next cycle: voice-recognition technology to operate phones and computing devices without push-buttons and keyboards.

"And breakthroughs to deliver video on the Internet as Napster now delivers audio," says Kessler of Velocity Capital.

Even in bad times, as the fellow says, "invention has not ceased."

* * *
James Flanigan can be reached at jim.flanigan@latimes.com

* * *

First Steps to Change
Companies and society often take years to adopt inventions and innovation, as is illustrated by history:
Printing press, circa 1450 By 1500, an estimated 30,000 titles had been published in Europe, leading to an information revolution that continues six centuries later.

* * *
Telephone, 1876
American Telephone & Telegraph incorporated, 1885
* By 1939, AT&T controlled 83% of all U.S. telephones and manufactured 90% of all U.S. phone equipment.

* * *
Model T, 1908
Henry Ford introduced assembly-line production of the Model T. About 15 million had been produced by the late 1920s, making cars accessible to the average American.

* * *
First powered flight, 1903
DC-3, first successful commercial airliner, introduced, 1935
* The Wright brothers' 57-second flight at Kitty Hawk opened the door to commercial flight, jets and the space shuttle.

* * *
Television, 1927
By 1951 there were about 15 million TV sets in the United States, up from 1.5 million the year before.

* * *
ENIAC, Electronic Numerical Integrator and Calculator, 1946
Apple II introduced, 1977
* ENIAC and the Apple II revolutionized computing.

* * *
Transistor, 1947
Intel founded, 1968
* The world's first microprocessor, Intel's 4004, was introduced in 1971.

* * *
The Internet, 1969
Netscape founded, 1994
* Netscape's graphical interface led to an explosion of Internet use more than two decades after the first computer was connected to the ARPAnet, the precursor to today's Internet, in 1969.



To: Rmooney who wrote (1196)4/15/2001 12:50:28 PM
From: Ian@SI  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3294
 
RM,

URL is: miami.com

And in case that doesn't work, the column is a keeper. Thanks. Ian.

++++++++++++++++

Published Sunday, April 15, 2001, in The Miami Herald



New Economy goes
from Boo.com
to boo-hoo

By DAVE BARRY

Let's take a look at your investment portfolio.
In the current market, you should have most
of your money in something fairly
conservative, such as a coffee can buried
under your house. If you want to diversify,
you might consider investing in two separate
coffee cans. Whatever you do, do NOT put
money in the stock market.

The reason you should avoid the stock market is that -- to put it in technical terms -- nobody
knows anything. This is abundantly obvious from the financial reporting on the TV news. No
matter what the stock market does, the TV news always boils down to this:

TOM BROKAW: The stock market today went either down or up, and nobody on this earth
knows why. For more, here's our financial expert.

FINANCIAL EXPERT: Tom, analysts attributed the movement of the market to a market
movement, in which the market moves either upward or downward, depending on the direction
of the market, although sometimes it holds still.

BROKAW: And is this expected to continue?

FINANCIAL EXPERT: Tom, it's too soon to tell.

In terms of solid information, we're in the same situation as members of a primitive tribe seeing
their first solar eclipse. We're sitting around, pounding roots, when suddenly ... the sun is going
out! We don't understand! We're scared!

Fortunately, we have witch doctors. They explain that the sun is being swallowed by a giant
worm, and that they can scare it away by performing certain dance steps while waving a magic
feather and wearing a hat made from the skull of a weasel. We believe them, because, hey,
they must know something, right? How else could they become professional witch doctors?

It's the same with the stock market, except that instead of a giant worm, we have a recession;
and instead of witch doctors, we have expert financial analysts; and instead of a weasel skull,
we have Alan Greenspan. What we DON'T have is any kind of clue as to what the stock market
is going to do.

That's why, for quality entertainment, you can't beat TV commercials for large investment
institutions. They all have the same message, which is: ``These are scary times for investors,
so GIVE US YOUR MONEY! You can trust us, because we have a large building.''

Sure! We can trust these institutions! We know this because 18 months ago, they all ran
commercials that said: ``Sell your stocks right now! The market is about to go into the toilet!''

Remember those commercials? Ha ha! Of course not. Eighteen months ago, the same
institutions were running commercials that said: ``Everybody is getting rich in the stock market,
so GIVE US YOUR MONEY! Then go shopping for your helicopter!''

The thing is, they meant it. Eighteen months ago, the experts sincerely believed that we were
in a New Economy, and the way to get rich was to invest in a new business model, a business
model based on a revolutionary economic principle: stupidity.

This was the principle behind the dot-com boom, a wonderful example of which was an internet
company called Boo.com. According to an article I read in The New York Times, Boo.com was
conceived as an Internet site that would sell, at full price, ``urban chic clothing ... that was so
cool it wasn't even cool yet.''

In other words, Boo.com was going to sell, with no discount, clothes that most people were not
wearing! This idea was so obviously stupid that it was irresistible to the financial experts. Big
investors, including the prestigious financial firm J.P. Morgan, hurled millions of dollars at
Boo.com; Fortune Magazine named it one of the ``Cool Companies of 1999.''

Using modern, New-Economy business practices, Boo.com managed to go through $185
million in 18 months. Among the vital things it spent money on was an official cartoon mascot
named Miss Boo. Fashion and hair consultants were flown from New York to London and paid
thousands of dollars per day to work on Miss Boo's ``look.'' It really paid off, too! Miss Boo is a
real looker, as you'll see if you visit the Boo.com site, which is less ambitious now, and under
new management, since the original company went bankrupt, along with the rest of the New
Economy.

But J.P. Morgan is still here, and so is Fortune Magazine, and so are all the other financial
experts, dancing around, waving their magic feathers. They no longer believe in the New
Economy. I don't know what they believe in at the moment, but I'm sure they believe in it very
deeply. And despite the skepticism I've expressed in this column, I believe there ARE some
good investment opportunities in today's market. I myself am heavily into Maxwell House.