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 : EMC How high can it go? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JakeStraw who wrote (14155)	4/24/2002 9:23:17 AM
From: Bald Eagle	Respond to of 17183

SHREVEPORT, La., Apr 22, 2002 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- StockPickReport.Com (CRD#119079 - stockpickreport.com ) makes these stock evaluations for the short term: Brocade Communications (Nasdaq: BRCD chart, msgs) - Underperform Emc Corp (NYSE: EMC chart, msgs) - Outperform

To: JakeStraw who wrote (14155)	4/24/2002 12:04:49 PM
From: Gus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17183

Storage Tank was announced with much fanfare in early 2000. It was supposed to come out in late 2001, but now it appears that it won't even be ready until 2003!!! Not so coincidentally, the new timeline for Storage Tank comes soon after yet another IBM alliance, this time with Hitachi. Some of you will recall that Storage Tank was first introduced soon after IBM entered into an ill-fated alliance with Compaq in 2000. The proposed sale of IBM's money-losing disk drive division to Hitachi's money-losing disk drive division confirms that IBM had been using its disk drive unit to subsidize its scorched earth price war against EMC in order to protect its mainframe upgrade cycle, which started in December 2000. According to Goldman Sachs, this $3.0B unit lost something like $600M last year and was on track to lose a similar amount this year. Keep in mind that IBM only pulls in of about $250M to $300M in Shark revenues to understand the magnitude of this 'subsidy.' The mainframe accounts for less than $1.5B a year in hardware revenues but still pulls in more than $8.0B a year in software and services revenues so IBM's decision to defend its mainframe upgrade cycle may be understandable. But now that the current mainframe cycle may already have peaked in 4Q2001, IBM's ability to maintain its pricing policy is in serious doubt along with its relentless bid for technology mind share given its historical antagonism towards siphoning processing power from the server and distributing it at the disk array and storage network levels.