SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Gus who wrote (14245)5/19/2002 12:43:47 PM
From: pirate_200  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 17183
 
Repost: EMC's manufactured market share numbers

We've been through this previously: EMC double-counts their
NAS and SAN revenue. Per example, I include again for probably
the 10th time, a description of this game for the one quarter
that EMC actually admitted doing this in their quarterly
conference call. Note that since that time, they won't divulge
or talk about the double-counting.

I'll also again state: why won't anyone from EMC come out and
explain this all for us? I'll gladly retract this note given
an explanation of "why the math doesn't work".

Repost: EMC's manufactured market share numbers
========
See: Message 16737798
========
> You don't even friggin' understand the basic definition of NIS
> -- SAN (includes SAN/NAS hybrids) plus NAS (includes SAN/NAS
> hybrids) less SAN/NAS hybrids

> Double-counting revenue ordinarily means cooking the books,
> a criminal offense.

That's right. EMC doesn't put this SAN/NAS breakout in their
10-Q, because then they *would be* committing a crime.

Double-counting in the SAN and NAS segments. If there were no
double counting, there wouldn't be anything to subtract in the
NIS equation above. The reason "less SAN/NAS hybrids" exists
is because that portion is being double-counted in the SAN
and NAS segments. You either understand this and are playing
dumb, or you are severely math challenged.

If you can't figure out the math equation, ask yourself
why the phrase "SAN/NAS hybrids" exists in both the SAN
and NAS part of the equation and also gets subtracted
out in the end.

Follow the math for last quarter:

1. EMC says their NIS revenue (SAN+NAS) was $449M.

2. EMC said the SAN revenue was $385M.

3. EMC said the NAS revenue was $148M.

$385M and $148M is $553M, why isn't the NIS number $553M rather
than $449M? The reason, is that "hybrid" revenue is counted
*both* in the SAN *and* NAS market segments, so if EMC left it
in, they would be reporting non-existent revenue. So, $84M has
to be subtracted out to report the real revenue $449M. If you
don't think this is true, then EMC has $84M of revenue that
they aren't reporting because they are reporting $449M in revenue
for both SAN and NAS, not $553M.

EMC reports the "hybrid" revenue in both the individual SAN
*and* NAS segments. Most likely, the major portion of the
hybrid revenue is put into the NAS numbers, but I'm sure they
juice numbers in both segments.

EMC could have easily said we have $84M split between SAN and
NAS, let's split the $84M. If so, SAN would be $343M and NAS
would be $106M, the total (NIS, SAN+NAS) would be $343M +
$106M or $449. The math works.

Instead, some "genius" in EMC marketing says let's count the
"hybrid" revenue both in the SAN and NAS markets individually
to boost our market share.

The sad part is that the analysts on the conference call
apparently can't do math either. That, or they have enough
interest in not exposing the fallacy that they refuse to ask
the question publicly on the conference call.

And if there's anyone that works for EMC that can explain this
creative marketing for us, please post. I'm fully willing
to retract all this if someone simply shows me the math.
========