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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Clarksterh who wrote (120578)6/17/2002 9:43:26 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
hi Clark,

Oh come now!? You know that the whole point of this discussion is technology (i.e. captial equipment depreciation) and interest expense which are precisely those thing excluded from EBITDA. Nice try at changing the subject.

am i changing the subject? let's look at your original question to which i responded:

Why can't you acknowledge that from a cash flow situation AWE's is substantially worse than PCS'?

so you asked about cash flow and i answered with specific historical EBITDA figures (which showed AWE had higher EBITDA last year than PCS). and then you claimed i changed the subject. are you aware of what the term "cash flow" means? do you know what the relation between "cash flow" and EBITDA is? do you need me to explain these basic concepts to you?

just as you would not want to have a technical CDMA debate with somebody who doesn't know the first thing about wireless technology, i don't want to debate financial issues with somebody who doesn't understand that, in the context of service providers, EBITDA MEANS THE SAME THING AS CASH FLOW!

Well, I disagree with using EBITDA at all for industries where there is, by definition, a sizable amount of capital investment ongoing.

ROFL! do you know why the concept of EBITDA was developed and which types of businesses it was applied to? let me give you a hint: it is the CAPITAL INTENSIVE ONES!