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: RetiredNow who wrote (53380)	5/24/2001 12:35:50 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Hmmm... there is substance beneath the tone. But the existence of the tone is telling too. I will be here in five years mindmeld, for I am a man of my word, and am comfortable being judged for good or for bad in the harsh light of history. I expect no more or less from you. PE: I think CSCO could have a PE of 40. I think they could have a PE of 20. I think that in 5 years the mania of the bubble will have passed and that their PE will look a lot like it did in '95 or '96 which was farther from 40 than it was from 20. I do not believe in prolonged manias. GAAP: I think pro-forma is a side show for the unenlightened and I don't give jack squat for what it shows because I'm one of the few who digs all the way under all of the numbers and tries to understand how they relate. Revenues: You have repeatedly given market study stuff that shows about 20 B$ worth of side show in a 60 B$ revenue forecast (go look at your numbers). Your revenue forecast depends mostly on three product lines, and on Router and Switch revenue in the main. With constant 5 year growth rates of 70 and 20% respectively. At sustained market share. Regardless of the threat that JNPR represents. So I think your 58 B$ revenue in 2005 is optimistic and simplistic. Furthermore, your characterization of me saying "no money" will roll in is literary hyperbole and detracts from the credibility of your rant. For I have been projecting several tens of billions more than "no" revenue. We have been in the information age for a coons age. I am personally well aware of the IT budget process. I am also aware that we have just passed through an IT capital availability boom and that it is naivete to the max to assume it will continue at multiples of current levels. You can toss around words like "a great fraction of all capital" and be right. And still not have enough capital to send their way. 60 Billions is an awful lot of money. It's 3x more than an awful lot of money. I could care less about bragging rights mindmeld, so if you are here to boast about how right you are well go right ahead and claim victory now. I'm here to test and form opinions by setting ideas in the open and testing them ruthlessly in advocacy. This isn't some juvenile chest-thumping contest as far as I'm concerned, so if you want to claim the largest chest and bestest thumps, well I bow victory to you. And when you are finished getting the acclaim from the crowds I will return to my pesky questioning and asking why you hold an opinion that differs from mine. Not to prove you are wrong, but to determine whether I should modify my stance. And I hope that you will still have the good grace to stoop to one so mentally inferior and answer without getting all blown up about it. Of all of the optimistic folks on the thread, at least you are posting reasoning. And it difficult to challenge. Nevertheless I am challenging like a terrier because even you have sometimes found yourself carried away by the roar of the crowd. And I have found the crowd to get easily carried away itself... or did anyone fail to notice the missing $60 or so in CSCO's stock price recently. No hard feelings, but this investing of money is serious business. John.