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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Technical analysis for shorts & longs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Johnny Canuck who wrote (34860)	10/23/2001 8:33:55 PM
From: Return to Sender	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 68076

The Book-to-Bill is out... Ouch! semi.org!OpenDocument North American Semiconductor Equipment Industry Posts September 2001 Book-to-Bill Ratio of 0.65 SAN JOSE, Calif., October 23, 2001 -- The North American-based manufacturers of semiconductor equipment posted $644 million in orders in September 2001 and a book-to-bill ratio of 0.65, according to the September 2001 Express Report published today by Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI). A book-to-bill of 0.65 means that $65 worth of new orders were received for every $100 of product shipped for the month. The three-month average of worldwide bookings in September 2001 was $644 million. The bookings figure is 11 percent below the revised August 2001 level of $724 million and 78 percent below the $2.89 billion in orders posted in September 2000. The three-month average of worldwide shipments in September 2001 was $993 million. The shipments figure is 13 percent below the revised August 2001 level of $1.15 billion and is 60 percent below the September 2000 shipments level of $2.48 billion. "As expected, recent global events have exacerbated the already poor forward visibility for high-tech industries as consumer confidence remains weak and businesses hold off on spending," said Stanley Myers, president and CEO of SEMI. "Industry analysts have been fairly unified in pushing out the timing of recovery for the semiconductor and capital equipment industries; it is still too early to determine the long-term fiscal effects of ongoing geo-political events." The SEMI book-to-bill is a ratio of three-month moving average bookings to three-month moving average shipments for the North American semiconductor equipment industry. Shipments and bookings figures are in millions of U.S. dollars.

To: Johnny Canuck who wrote (34860)	10/24/2001 1:21:50 AM
From: Johnny Canuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 68076

AVCI, SCMR, CORV: Fallen Telecom Stars Can't Muster Much Shine By Cody Willard Special to TheStreet.com 10/22/2001 04:22 PM EDT These days, companies like Corvis (CORV:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis), Sycamore (SCMR:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) and Avici (AVCI:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) have viable products and great technologies, but no demand. Related Stories More Groans From Nortel, Sycamore, Corning Nasty Shakeout Awaits Once-Hot Networkers Choose a Careful Route for Telecom Investments Nothing Doing Now, but Don't Give Up on Telecom How to Play the Telco-Tech Sector All three companies developed cutting-edge telecommunications technologies focusing on the core of the network -- exactly the place where no money is being spent. Once cherished by investors, these fallen stars are having a tough time trying to shine because no one is buying their products. Let's take 'em one by one. Corvis has the best long-haul platform, which carries voice and data information over long distances, but it came late to the party. By the time its long-haul platform was ready, next-generation long-haul carriers like Level 3 (LVLT:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis), Global Crossing (GX:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) and Qwest (Q:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) had pretty much completed their buildouts and/or had committed to other platforms. And Corvis' platform is just that: a platform. It's not like the overbuilders can buy a single switch here or there to throw into their networks. They're either going to buy the Corvis platform or they're not. Because different platforms can factor into the entire design of the network -- and these carriers had plowed their not-so-hard-earned billions into Ciena's (CIEN:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis), Nortel's (NT:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) and Sycamore's long-haul platforms -- just about everyone but Broadwing (BRW:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) chose the latter. Avici has some of the best routers in the business, but, like Corvis, it got its products out way too late. I've written before about Avici's problems trying to compete with Cisco (CSCO:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) and Juniper (JNPR:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis), two of the very best-run companies in telecom. It ain't getting any easier. Sycamore is a bit of a different animal. It wasn't late to the game -- in fact, its long-haul switches were available during warm-ups, as the long-haul carriers were raising their billions and laying out route scenarios. The company went public and immediately began blowing away the Street's estimates, turning profitable before I thought it could. Alas, Sycamore's profitability disappeared along with the market caps of Williams (WCG:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) and 360networks, as I had said long ago that 360's problems (read: disasters) would wreak havoc on Sycamore's revenue. Other Common Factors Besides having great technologies and viable products, these companies have at least a few other things in common: nice balance sheets, but no chance of near-term (or intermediate-term) profitability. Corvis has $2.22 a share in cash, while Avici has $3.40 and Sycamore has $3.37. None of the companies has any significant debt. The question is then (and boy, don't I know it from all the emails), why don't I include them in my recent recommendations? The target markets of these companies have all but collapsed, with no chance of turning around anytime soon. That makes it highly unlikely that these companies will be able to turn around their own prospects. Too many questions exist about the viability of these companies' businesses, the viability of their technologies notwithstanding. While companies like Tellabs (TLAB:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) and Advanced Fibre (AFCI:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) continue to have some (admittedly limited) visibility into demand, that comes mostly from essentially the only rich carriers in the U.S. -- the incumbent local exchange carriers -- exactly the type of customers that Corvis, Avici and Sycamore don't have enough of. Wedding Bells? Sycamore and Corvis do make somewhat attractive acquisition targets. Tellabs has been out scouting potential matches, and whether it finds the right partner is up in the air; a Tellabs-Sycamore combination wouldn't shock me. By linking up with Sycamore, Tellabs would gain a foothold into optical switching to complement its optical cross-connect product line. Alcatel (ALA:NYSE ADR - news - commentary - research - analysis), Lucent's (LU:NYSE - news - commentary - research - analysis) former suitor, is a possible match for Corvis, because Corvis' technology would fit nicely into Alcatel's product line. However, this combination would still leave Alcatel needing a better suite of customers. Cisco, of course, remains a likely suitor for downtrodden vendors and could have an interest in Sycamore, although I believe Ciena or companies in the storage sector (as reported in a recent UBS Warburg report) would be a more likely scenario. Cisco would be more interested in gaining the bigger market share of Ciena, even with its higher price tag. Avici, unfortunately for shareholders, would be a difficult acquisition for most anyone to utilize, as Nortel, Lucent and every other vendor besides the anomalous Juniper have the scars (and losses and writedowns) from trying to take on Cisco. I wouldn't buy any of these companies in hopes of cashing out on an acquisition -- particularly when there are profitable (or soon-to-be profitable) companies out there trading at similar values that you can buy for investment purposes rather than acquisition-gambling purposes -- but such possibilities do exist.