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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : INSP Investors Research -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (179)	9/26/2001 3:28:10 PM
From: howsmydrivingal	Respond to of 787

Thanks, Looking forward to reading when I have time!

To: KLP who wrote (179)	9/27/2001 12:28:36 PM
From: howsmydrivingal	Respond to of 787

by: ridelongride 09/27/01 11:56 am Msg: 303172 of 303176 Time to Play Defense? By Roben Farzad September 25, 2001 ARE DEFENSE STOCKS the right weapons for your portfolio? In the wake of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, the answer would seem to be obvious. As soon as the market reopened on Sept. 17, defense mainstays like Northrop Grumman (NOC), Lockheed Martin (LMT) and General Dynamics (GD) posted double-digit percentage gains while the Standard & Poor's 500 index tumbled 7%. But a look at history shows that while geopolitical turmoil can make defense stocks look like sure bets, they've usually turned out to be anything but. The 1990s, for example, began with Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, which was followed by Operation Desert Storm, the largest American military campaign in years. But with the Cold War simultaneously ending, the expected boom times for defense contractors never materialized. Save for the occasional, short-lived air strike in Iraq or the Balkans, the decade instead became notable for the emergence of the so-called peace dividend — in which reduced military spending freed up budget dollars for other goals. The defense sector thus ended up drastically underperforming the broader market, which staged its biggest bull run ever... And while there may well be a conventional military strike against Afghanistan in the coming days or weeks, the nature of the long-term struggle against terrorism is likely to take a quite different form — one that may bring little benefit to traditional defense contractors. "This isn't going to be a Gulf War scenario," predicts defense industry analyst Thomas Meagher of BB&T Capital Markets. "It will be waged in the shadows — in the back streets of Berlin and Bombay. And to win this war, you have to fight with the best intelligence." In other words, the war on terror might ultimately have little to do with traditional "bomber and missile" suppliers like Lockheed and Northrop... The future of defense, according to analysts like Meagher, lies instead in next-generation information-technology-services firms with significant ties to the defense industry; detection and prevention are especially key. Communications supplier L-3 Communications (LLL), for instance, specializes in bomb-detection equipment and secure wireless and satellite systems for destroyers and jets, and could be a big beneficiary. Ditto for little-known Titan (TTN), which provides government wireless technologies, and Caci International (CACI), a favorite of the Defense Department for its battlefield-simulation machinery. Meagher is also a fan of General Dynamics, a specialist in aerospace- and marine-defense technology whose shares continue to trade in all-time-high territory. *********** from another message board

To: KLP who wrote (179)	9/27/2001 1:03:06 PM
From: howsmydrivingal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 787

KLP, The BENS organization, Business Executives for National Security, has quite the list of members. Your first link has a section of members. Noticed Jain is a member as well as countless others. I do not know enough about the prestige and benefit of becoming a board member for an organization, like Hearney for INSP, but it does seem to be important. Would not the President and CEO of such an organization like BENS, being a spokesman for a company (like INSP) carry a fair amount of weight? For those who were/are a bit squeamish on the prospect of JAIN instilling trust, respect, and well-rounded business sense on Wall Street and beyond, General Hearney coming to the Board of INSP AT THIS PRESENT TIME is clearly a very good development. Unlike the good news about INSP buying back 21.7 million shares, where you have to wonder at some level why Vulcan sold out (I know tax reasons right?), Hearney's move to INSP is a unilateral win, IMHO. Much like the Dydacomp news, Union Bank news, Wells Fargo news, and Verizion news. All this news announced since INSP Guided down 40% last conference call. Again, we don't know how INSP is structuring its deals and how much revenue it will presently add with all of this. But market share is going clearly in INSP's favor. That means the competition is not getting it. At the very least, INSP is gaining real world knowledge of running their services on a larger scale, problem solving, risk assessment, security, technical tweaking to keep the system live, ect... The knowledge gained by 'time in the field' will strengthen INSP's product.