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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (11614)	12/4/2001 5:13:24 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

I read this declaration (below) and always kept it. I posted it a couple of times here and I post it again today. "In a presentation to Wall Street analysts a few weeks ago, Lou Gerstner, the boss of IBM, described the new “dot-com” companies as “fireflies before the storm—all stirred up, throwing off sparks”. But he continued: “The storm that’s arriving—the real disturbance in the force—is when the thousands and thousands of institutions that exist today seize the power of this global computing and communications infrastructure and use it to transform themselves. That’s the real revolution." The Economist ,Jun. 24th, 1999. The bubble burst and I was just expecting the big guys to seize the power. It is happeing right now. All that dot.com debacle was just the fireflies being blown away by the storm. Here are the guys that make new economy a reality: Go to their sites. They are the dot.coms of today!!! These guys are making abracadabra happen! kpmg.com accenture.com pwcglobal.com deloitte.com us.cgey.com

To: TobagoJack who wrote (11614)	1/14/2002 3:58:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

< ... am troubled by this seemingly self-perpetuating, always productivity enhancing, but profitless prosperity. I do not understand money without wealth, prosperity without security, productivity without manufacturing, import without export, and service economy without manufacturing client base. I have no history as a guide. I suspect, as you do, that the ability to generate revenue is being redistributed....> Jay, I do think the ability to generate revenue is being moved. I consider it a good thing. Back in the 1980s I used to argue in BP for an education and research centre to be built in China with a view to hiring many high-IQ females to educate them and get things done cheaply. Of course males too, but I thought women were probably disproportionately being ignored in China. More of them at a lower price would be available and they'd love to have the opportunity. I've ranted similarly about QUALCOMM needing to do the same thing. Now they are. Which is great. [Not the women part of it, but they will of course take on women too]. With many Chinese companies competing for international business [and local], instead of fighting each other over ideologies in the PLA and waving little red books, there has been, and will increasingly be, a vast productivity increase [measured in US$]. 100 women producing nothing 20 years ago are now in a position to produce swarms of cellphones at low cost. Since their lives are dramatically better than previously, I don't think it's accurate to call it profitless prosperity, though the actual revenue will shrink and so will profits so in the financial sense it's profitless. When people's lives dramatically improve [the women making the phones, the companies too, the buyers of those phones and the customers those buyers serve with those phones], it is a good thing and most people are much better off than when a huge profit was made by Motorola in the USA for producing 10,000 phones in the 1980s. As you meant, the question for investors is to figure out what the heck this productivity change means and how to make a profit during low revenue prosperity. It's deflation and Uncle Al prints money to avoid deflation, so I expect we will see continuing rapid increases in US$ supply. The $ exporting game can go on for a longggg time yet, without inflation, if China continues growth as we've had for decades now [2 anyway]. So yes, it's profitless prosperity, but great news. Investors will need caution to not pay USA prices for China profit. Overpaid people in Hong Kong, USA and elsewhere [Japan, Korea as you mentioned] will have to get another job. Which is not so great for them. But on the ancient utilitarian principles, the world is a better place. In a similar vein, I thought the bad news points you listed were good news points <Attention. Here comes the bad news. I am more concerned about the world in this era of globalization. For example, China’s mobile subscriber, divided amongst only three companies (85/15/0%), just reached the one hundred thirty three million milestone. I believe Korea, Japan and Nokia will soon be out of the handset manufacturing business, except via owned or contracted factories based in China.> I consider it good that lower paid people get the work. It's good for them and good for their customers. The Japanese will just continue to live off their savings and investments [and newly built joint venture production facilities in China]. That's what I do, so why shouldn't the Japanese, who also worked hard and saved for decades? QUALCOMM will sell the ASICs at the standard price and if the rest of the phone costs $5 to produce, then that means QUALCOMM's share of the phone and the demand for them zooms skywards, though royalties reduce - except that functionality will dramatically increase as phones turn into cybernetcomputerphones at higher prices so royalties won't reduce all that much - just as PCs have stayed the same price for a couple of decades. So, people around the world will enjoy vast functionality and low prices. Which is good for nearly everyone [but not Nokia, Motorola and other high-priced producers]. Mqurice PS: My long-deceased mother would be proud of me for recolonizing China and providing them an opportunity to join the modern world and enjoy using the latest and greatest technology produced by my very own company! She wouldn't like the 'colonizing' part, but that's what I like to call it.