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.
Strategies & Market Trends : The New Economy and its Winners -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/13/2002 8:19:22 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
Nasdaq Removes 12 Tech Cos. From Index

By AMY BALDWIN, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK - It's a sign of bearish times: As the Nasdaq Stock Market did its annual reshuffling of the Nasdaq-100 Index Friday, technology issues got the boot in favor of safer consumer and industrial companies.

"Too much tech got in there and so naturally some has to come out," said Scott Bleier, president of Hybridinvestors.com, a research advisory service.

The Nasdaq announced late Friday that it was removing 15 companies from the index — 12 of them were technology companies. They were replaced with companies primarily in the consumer, health care and industrial sectors. The changes take place when the market opens on Dec. 23.

Among those issues leaving the index: Chip makers Vitesse Semiconductor Inc. and PMC-Sierra, troubled biotech ImClone Systems Inc., and software maker Rational Software Corp.

Stocks being added to the index include: Retailers Ross Stores Inc. and PetsMart Inc., Fastenal Co., an industrial company, and First Health Group Corp. A complete list of the additions and deletions can be found on Nasdaq's Web site.

Analysts had expected Nasdaq to drop tech issues in favor of more old economy companies given the steep declines tech has endured throughout the bear market. Since peaking in 2000, the technology sector's presence in the index has been falling along with tech stock prices.

"Literally, in the index, the weight of technology has declined," said Nicholas Gulden, an analyst with Salomon Smith Barney.

Stock indexes are often reconfigured annually to keep pace with changes in the market. In this case, the Nasdaq-100 tracks the largest non-financial companies that trade on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

"You want to rerank your index periodically so that it continues to fulfill its mission. The Nasdaq-100 is the index of the largest 100 non-financial issues on Nasdaq," said John L. Jacobs, president of Nasdaq Investment Product Services.

The Nasdaq-100 closed Friday at 1,005.85, down more than 75 percent from its 2000 high.

The Nasdaq-100 tracks some of the biggest names in technology, including Microsoft Corp., Intel Corp. and Cisco Systems Inc. It also is the basis for the exchange traded fund known as the "Triple Q" or the "Qubes" because of its ticker symbol, QQQ.

The Triple Q, which boasts $20 billion in assets, is the mostly actively traded U.S. equity issue with daily volume surpassing 90 million this year.



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/15/2002 4:47:13 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
In the Empire of Siebel, Stirrings of Rebellion

By GRETCHEN MORGENSON
The New York Times
December 15, 2002

AT last, more and more institutional shareholders are sharpening their pitchforks and taking them up against imperial corporate executives.

The Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana has sued Siebel Systems, contending that since 1996, the company's board has awarded more stock options to Thomas M. Siebel, the founder and chief, than shareholders have approved and that some grants to Siebel directors have not been disclosed. The suit also contends that the company has improperly accounted for options issued at a discount to prevailing market prices. As a result, the suit questions Mr. Siebel's certification in August of the company's financial statements.

The $10.6 billion retirement fund, which owns 392,000 Siebel shares, has asked executives and directors, including Charles R. Schwab, the brokerage firm executive, to return what it calls the "tainted options." Mr. Schwab did not return a call seeking comment.

Stuart M. Grant, a partner at Grant & Eisenhofer in Wilmington, Del., represents the pension fund. Siebel Systems "fosters an environment of the all-powerful C.E.O. and an abdicating board," he said. "They are fighting us, but we're saying, `If you cure this corporate governance problem, you will be a better company.' "

A Siebel spokesman said that the company had never issued options at discounts to the market price and that its accounting and disclosure were proper. The company called the suit baseless; it must file a response by Christmas.

Since its creation in 1993, Siebel has been a big believer in stock options. From 1996 through 2001, Mr. Siebel received options worth almost $1 billion at the time of the grant, the lawsuit says. Siebel Systems' stock has lost 94 percent of its value since its 2000 peak and is down 72 percent this year, so many of his options are underwater. But from 1998 to 2001, Mr. Siebel exercised almost six million options and realized gains of $321 million related to them.

From 1996 to 2000, according to the suit, Mr. Siebel got the maximum number of options and a higher salary and a bonus. In recent years, according to the complaint, the compensation committee met less and less.

In 1996, when he received $320,000 in cash and two million options, the committee met five times. In 2000, when he got $2.5 million in cash and eight million options, it met once. Last year, the committee did not meet at all. It gave Mr. Siebel only $1 in cash compensation but again gave him the maximum eight million options.

According to the suit, the compensation committee members realized more than $36 million through their own option exercises. They are A. Michael Spence, a partner at Oak Hill Venture Partners, and Eric E. Schmidt, the chairman of closely held Google Inc., the Internet search engine. Mr. Spence did not reply to an e-mail message seeking comment; Mr. Schmidt did not return a phone call.

Siebel Systems says its option program motivates employees, but it is not clear why Mr. Siebel needs motivating. He owns 7.5 percent of the company's stock, a stake that is worth around $280 million at current prices.

Siebel's reaction to the case shows that its executives continue to believe that me-first practices, so common during the bubble, are fine even now. Before the suit was filed, Mr. Grant said, the fund tried to persuade the Siebel executives to make the board more independent and return the options it said had been granted improperly. The fund also asked Siebel to let an independent accountant decide the option accounting issue. Siebel declined on both counts.

Amazing, isn't it, how some executives think it's still O.K. to stuff their pockets with stock options, then stiff-arm the owners who complain?

nytimes.com



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/15/2002 2:15:14 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
Here we go again

Increased broadband use and growing Internet access in Asia mean the telecom industry is taking off again. When it will peak is anyone's guess

Wynn Quon
National Post
Friday, December 13, 2002

Investors burned by the collapse of telecom share prices in the past two years may not want to hear this, but it's true. This most vilified of industries is about to regain its luster, and for three reasons.

First, new killer apps are rapidly chewing up the excess bandwidth capacity built during the boom. Second, emerging countries in the Asia Pacific region are adopting the Internet at an accelerated pace. Finally the peculiar economics of the post-bubble telecom era lend themselves to a rebirth. The prospects are strong enough that yet another speculative boom and bust could be on the horizon.

Remember the go-go years in the late '90s when anything Internet-related was growing at double-digit rates? You would think that those days are forever gone, but they aren't. Take a look at what's happening in broadband Internet access. According to Nielsen, the number of high-speed Internet users in the United States (those using cable modems or DSL) grew from 15.9 million to 25.2 million, or 58% in the year ending April, 2002.

What's going on? Why are people flocking to high-speed access? Two words: sheer fun. They're signing up for the free music, video and software provided by file sharing networks like Kazaa. At any given time, there are upwards of 4 million users on Kazaa providing a base of over 500 million mostly pirated music files (enough to give any music industry executive Internet apoplexy). They're playing online games, experiencing the visceral thrills of cyberwar. It's true that much of this is already available to the dial-up-56K user, but the difference that speed makes is crucial. A broadband user can download 100 songs (or about 10 albums) in 30 minutes. The dial-up user, on the other hand, is in for a thumb-twiddling wait of over four hours. And while it's possible for dial-up users to play chess and card games over the Internet, compelling online gaming experiences such as CounterStrike, Unreal Tournament and the newer Xbox titles are only available to broadband users. A sign of how big online gaming will become: Xbox Live, the new Microsoft broadband gaming module, completely sold out in its first week of release in late November.

While the United States is taking broadband to heart, demand for bandwidth in emerging economies, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, is also on a tear. While it's inevitable that China will be wired to the Internet, what's surprising is that this is happening at an unexpectedly rapid pace. This year China surpassed Japan as the country with the second highest number of Internet users in the world (the United States takes first place) with over 50 million users, according to Nielsen. This is remarkable given that there were only 22 million users last year. Furthermore, the government has set a goal to have 200 million people online by 2005.

Torrid growth is a natural result of two good things: Consumer incomes are rising and PC prices are plummeting. (An internet-capable PC can now be bought for less than US$300.) When it comes to broadband demand, the Asia-Pacific region is no slouch either; in fact it's red-hot. According to Instat/MDR, the number of DSL users alone leaped from 6.9 million to 10.3 million users in the first six months of 2002, a compound annual increase of about 100%.

The boom in broadband business and the explosive growth of Internet users in Asia means billions of dollars for telecom operators and telecom equipment providers alike. What's more, the competitive structure of the telecom industry (or lack thereof) is likely to juice profits. The '90s was supposedly the decade of deregulation and competition. The local telephone monopolies were seen as fat, easy prey for nimbler New Economy carriers. Hundreds of competitive carriers rose to the challenge buoyed by free-flowing venture capital.

But in an ironic twist, after the decimation of the past couple of years, it is the monopolies like SBC and Verizon that remain standing. Carriers like Global Crossing and many others have flamed out spectacularly, selling their assets for pennies on the dollar. The result is that, in a world of continually falling technology prices, the telecom carriers have preserved their pricing power.

This is particularly true in broadband access. Customers wanting fast Internet access are generally limited to two providers, their local phone company or their local cable provider. As a result broadband prices have remained high. In the United States, local telecom giant, Verizon, for example, charges US$70 per month for its DSL service. Despite this pricey offering, customers are flocking to the service. Verizon has seen its DSL subscriber base grow 70% annually. Here in Canada, the cost of Bell's Sympatico DSL service has actually increased 10% in the past year.

It's well known that the biggest problem facing the telecom industry is the massive debt burdens taken on during the boom years. The good news is that renewed vigour in broadband markets and in overseas Internet access means that the debt will be worked off a lot faster than the markets are currently anticipating. In fact, as telecom carriers become newly flush with cash, the ripple effect will prompt a resurgence in the entire sector.

What's the telecom investor to do? Conventional wisdom holds that the days of making a fortune in the likes of Nortel and Lucent are over. It's said that Nortel will never hit $120 again. That may be true, but canny investors don't need it to. In the Great Telecom Bubble from 1998 to 2000, Nortel's price rose tenfold. In the Telecom Bust of 2002, Nortel sank to a low of US$0.43. It has only to rise to a little over US$4 for the same tenfold performance.

Of course, a telecom resurgence is not guaranteed. The principal risk, though, doesn't lie within the industry. The main threat: a global economic slowdown that precipitates a debt crisis. But on the plus side, the markets seem to have taken this at least partly into consideration. Prices for telecom stocks are still at decade lows. The combined market capitalization of the two top telecom equipment makers -- Nortel and Lucent -- is about US$12-billion, even though their total sales for the past year are twice as much. Prices for telecom carriers are also cheap, considering that many sport a dividend yield of 4% or more.

It's also worth taking a longer perspective. To see what's likely to happen in telecom in the next few years, let's review a lesson from distant history. Many tech investors now know that the Telecom Bubble was similar to the speculative boom associated with the introduction of the railroad in the 19th century. What is less known is that the railroad mania was not a single event. The first episode of railroad mania happened in 1837 in England, but this was followed by further booms in 1847, 1857 and 1873 as railroad construction swept through Europe and then North America.

The same kind of cyclical boom-and-bust scenario is likely with telecoms. It's hard to guess when the next telecom boom will peak. The interval between telecom booms may be shorter than the 10-year intervals between the railroad booms simply because the cost and time to deploy Internet and broadband access is considerably less. Rates of adoption are hence faster, and this shows up as rapid, exponential growth in subscriber bases and revenues.

One thing is for sure though: The last fortune in telecoms has not yet been made.

Wynn Quon is chief technology analyst at Legado Associates. E-mail: wynn_quon@hotmail.com

© Copyright 2002 National Post

nationalpost.com



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/16/2002 1:49:10 PM
From: Bill Harmond  Respond to of 57684
 
biz.yahoo.com



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/16/2002 3:58:55 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
Is the worst behind applications software?

tweisel.com



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15343)12/16/2002 4:44:27 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 57684
 
an outstanding day- I'm off to go spend and do my part for the economy!

Rumors of lots of RFPs in the telecom/router area- here's to hope... :-)

Lizzie