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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gdichaz who wrote (48886)	11/14/2001 12:25:01 PM
From: EnricoPalazzo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

After considerable discussion here, Qualcomm was accorded full gorilla status (as a CDMA gorilla), while JDSU was a consensus king not a gorilla. Not that it should matter <insert bit about perils of groupthink here>, but there is not consensus that Qualcomm is a Gorilla. And the point that Thomas has harped on ought to be harped on some more--Gorilla-ness is not a yes/no question; it's a to-what-extent question, just like strong brand, low-cost position, etc. Certainly everyone can agree that Intel & Qualcomm possess many Gorilla characteristics. BTW, I think you'd also find a near-consensus that Siebel is a Gorilla (with possibly years of strong growth ahead of it).

To: gdichaz who wrote (48886)	11/14/2001 12:43:41 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

Chaz, << established gorillas as Microsoft , Intel, Cisco Systems, Oracle and SAP >> The original Moore gorillas named by Moore in both editions of the manual were indeed MSFT, INTC, CSCO, ORCL, and SAP. SAP gets VERY brief treatment compared to the others. << For a variety of reasons, neither Oracle nor SAP have been popular here as investments, and even if Moore calls them gorillas, there seems to be little support for giving them that status on this thread. Or perhaps even if in that status technically, not candidates for current investment. >> I remain in ORCL long, and consider it to be every bit as much a gorilla as MSFT, INTC, CSCO. I have no immediate plans to sell, but I have no plans to add either, but that is pretty much the same as the way I treat silverbacks MSFT, INTC, and CSCO at the moment. As for INTC, I personally still maintain that if it is not a gorilla then there is no gorilla game. << After considerable discussion here, Qualcomm was accorded full gorilla status (as a CDMA gorilla), while JDSU was a consensus king not a gorilla. >> I also think that SEBL, ITWO, and QCOM are gorillas. In the case of the first two I think Moore agrees and he did give some hint that he considered Qualcomm to be a young one as well. I do look at QCOM somewhat differently then you (and probably others on the thread) in that I consider it to be the gorilla of cdmaOne/cdma2000 - not CDMA - making it a local gorilla in Moore's terminology, and a chimpanzee in the overall wireless game. October 2001 really marks the inaugural date for that distinction in my mind since that was when WCDMA launched commercially in Japan and production infrastructure started shipping to carriers worldwide. The total lack of architectural control of WCDMA is the distinguishing factor and that becomes increasingly evident to me. Be that as it may be, Qualcomm's IPR platform is a significant asset, and the cdmaOne/cdma2000 market is also a significant mass market within the much larger wireless market. I think if I had a conversation today with Moore, I would explore his thoughts related to mine (that I expressed in the preceding paragraph). As for JDSU - I want to reexplore them. I maintain a sizeable position (profitable I might add - and dating back to the UNPH days with some early SDTI and some SDTI arb thrown in). Not a gorilla in my mind by any stretch and I'd also like to know how Moore came up with that possibility. I'm wondering if they are even a King to be honest. ... so anyway MY list of established gorillas is: - MSFT - INTC - CSCO - ORCL - SEBL - ITWO - QCOM [67% of my current all-tech equities portfolio] ... and possibly - SAP ... with maybe some gorilla genes in BEAS? - Eric -

To: gdichaz who wrote (48886)	11/17/2001 10:17:19 AM
From: Bruce Brown	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

For a variety of reasons, neither Oracle nor SAP have been popular here as investments, and even if Moore calls them gorillas, there seems to be little support for giving them that status on this thread. In terms of companies that have been around for a few years - Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, Manugistics, i2 and Seibel are certainly all still around. What one wants to call each of them doesn't limit what each has accomplished within their target niche in the software business. It seems the transition from client-server to web based architecture has kept them busy with product introductions and announcements over the past 12 or more months. PS Then there is the subsidiary question, would 3 silverbacks plus Qualcomm (perhaps) provide sufficient diversification and opportunity for the majority of portfolios - whether the entire portfolio or more realistically the tech portion, or even more realistically the G&K portion? For myself, I've always been under the impression that a technology only portfolio (or any sector) is not the best money management strategy unless one wants to take on the risk of playing a large swing trade move that is occurring with all boats floating in a multi-quarter move (such as we saw in the 1998 - 2000 which was doing quite well from 1995 to 1998 as well). If you want to only have large caps in your technology portion of your portfolio as a strategy, then certainly companies like Microsoft, Intel, Qualcomm and Cisco deserve attention for the right price in the G category. I'm not in favor of a large-cap only portfolio either - no matter what sector - but that's my personal preference. I like small-caps and mid-caps as well. In terms of the TALC for the products of those 4 large-caps, compelling stories remain intact. BB