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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mike Buckley who wrote (53400)1/14/2003 4:05:20 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
Web Services Nirvana: Fast Track or Slow Boat?

1/14/03
By Ed Raymond
www.CRMDaily.com

The trend toward Web services, which promise to provide dramatically easier integration between enterprise applications, has taken over the e-business spotlight recently. For instance, Siebel's (Nasdaq: SEBL - news) Universal Application Network, featured in Siebel 7.5, relies in part on Web services to enable links between Siebel CRM and other vendors' back-office applications.

Proponents say Web services will make it relatively easy for programs built on differing standards -- including Microsoft's .NET, Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE) and proprietary systems -- to share information, allowing them both to live useful lives within the same organization.

Siebel Systems' David Schmaier, executive vice president of products, wholeheartedly adopts that view. Schmaier recently told CRMDaily.com that .NET and J2EE are going to coexist, with Web services as "the lingua franca."

But how great an impact will Web services really have on corporate IT operations, and how soon? According to Schmaier, "in the next two or three years, if you don't embrace Web services, you won't exist as a software company."

Bridging Multiple Standards

Most large organizations today have multiple standards at work, and the difficulty of patching them together has been a major barrier to getting disparate corporate systems to communicate.

"You might have an order fulfillment system and an ERP (enterprise resource planning) system on two different platforms," said Eric Austvold, lead infrastructure analyst at AMR Research. "The question is, how do you share [information] between those two applications?" Historically, software vendors have left it up to the customer to figure out the answer, he told CRMDaily.

Dead Issue

"With the advent of Web services in the last 18 months, the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) has come up and said, 'Let's create a common set of languages and describe how you would share information between enterprise applications,'" Austvold explained.

"Web services eliminates the issue of whether you're using .NET or J2EE," Ed Abbo, vice president of technology at Siebel Systems, told CRMDaily. "Web services provides an abstraction layer that allows a systems developer to invoke the services of those applications without having to worry about the nuances of whether it's .NET or J2EE or a legacy platform.

"We believe that the world will be heterogeneous," he added. "Companies will continue to use both .NET and J2EE for their strengths."

Distant Horizon

But Austvold cautioned that it will be a while before anyone sees the full benefit of Web services. "It's got something like a ten-year horizon on it," he said. The standards are immature, and vendors are just starting to implement them.

Even when vendors fully support the standards, the customer will have to buy a specific version of a product that supports a particular standard, then implement it. "That time frame just by itself is going to be 36 to 48 months, minimally," Austvold said.

"What [proponents are] saying about Web services helping to broker the disparity between two different platforms is true," Austvold acknowledged, "but I'd caution that it's going to take quite a while for that to develop and have customers realize the benefit of that technology."

story.news.yahoo.com



To: Mike Buckley who wrote (53400)1/20/2003 2:50:33 AM
From: Caxton Rhodes  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
Pretty interesting that at least one of the authors of the GG is a sleaze ball lying cheat, no?

Caxton

$33 million settlement for Fleet

Todd Wallack, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, January 10, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FleetBoston Financial Corp. agreed to pay $33 million to settle federal charges that its defunct San Francisco investment arm, Robertson Stephens, parceled out shares in hot initial public offerings to investors in exchange for kickbacks, erased some of its e-mail and failed to supervise a research analyst who violated conflict-of-interest rules.

In a related action, the Securities and Exchange Commission also filed suit Thursday against the analyst, Paul Johnson, for allegedly issuing a "buy" recommendation on a stock he privately said was overpriced, and touting two merger deals without disclosing that he stood to earn millions of dollars on the transactions.

Johnson, 42, lives in New York and is pursuing another job in the securities industry, according to his attorney, Mark Pomerantz. Pomerantz said that Johnson's actions didn't violate any laws at the time and that his client will contest the SEC's allegations.

The government's move marks another chapter in the astonishing fall of Robertson Stephens, the investment boutique that became one of the largest underwriters of technology firms in 1999 and 2000 during the dot-com boom, only to collapse when the Internet bubble burst.

Fleet, which acquired Robertson Stephens in 1998 as part of its merger with Bank Boston, shuttered the unit in July after most of its business dried up and it racked up several quarters of losses.

The deal is also the latest effort by securities regulators to clamp down on investment firms amid complaints that Washington ignored rampant conflicts on Wall Street for years, eventually leading to a barrage of corporate scandals.

In recent weeks, the SEC struck a $1.4 billion settlement with 10 securities firms and a $32.5 million settlement with US Bancorp Piper Jaffray to settle charges they misled investors with inflated stock ratings.

And a year ago, Credit Suisse First Boston agreed to pay a $100 million fine to settle allegations that it improperly doled out IPO shares to investors in exchange for a share of the profit.

During the dot-com boom, tech IPOs often doubled or more in their first day of trading -- allowing the handful of investors with access to stocks at the initial offering price to turn a quick profit.

In this case, the SEC said Robertson Stephens distributed IPO shares in 1999 and 2000 to more than 100 investors who didn't normally qualify for the limited offerings.

In exchange, the investors agreed to pay inflated commissions, in some cases more than 4,000 percent higher than the standard rates, on other trades made around the time of the IPO. The SEC said there was "no economic purpose" for the trades other than to generate money for Robertson Stephens.

To settle that portion of the complaint, FleetBoston agreed to pay $28 million to the SEC and the National Association of Securities Dealers.

FleetBoston agreed to pay an additional $5 million fine to settle accusations that it failed to preserve all its e-mail for three years and didn't supervise Johnson closely enough.

Specifically, the SEC accused Johnson of touting two merger deals from which he secretly stood to reap enormous profit.

In the first case, Johnson invested $50,000 in a Mountain View communications equipment startup called Siara Systems in early 1999.

When Redback Networks agreed to buy the firm for $4.3 billion later that year, Johnson issued a report praising the deal as an "excellent strategic fit. " Under terms of the deal, Johnson's $50,000 stake would be worth close to $4. 8 million at the time.

Then, in January 2000, Johnson invested in Sirocco Networks, a Connecticut communications equipment startup. When Sycamore Networks agreed to buy the company for $2.9 billion five months later, Johnson issued a report calling it a "smart move on Sycamore's part." Under terms of the proposed merger, Johnson's $75,000 stake in Sirocco would be worth $1.9 million.

Though Robertson Stephens issued boilerplate disclaimers that its analysts might have "an interest in the securities" described in the report, they didn't specifically disclose the holdings, the government said.

The SEC says Robertson Stephens executives learned in 1999 that Johnson had made numerous investments in private companies without notifying the company as required, but did not monitor or review his investments for potential conflicts.

In addition, the SEC rapped Johnson for issuing a "buy" rating on Corvis, a Maryland optical communications equipment firm, when it was trading at $23 -- then telling an investment committee a week later: "I wouldn't buy at this price." Johnson said he would buy the stock at $12 to $14 instead.

Regulators said Johnson misled investors.

"Whenever analysts undertake to speak to the financial community . . . they have a duty to speak fully and completely, and disclose all material facts, said Yuri Zelinsky, who works in the SEC's enforcement division.

But Johnson's attorney says the SEC only recently changed the conflict-of- interest regulations to make the conduct illegal.

"Mr. Johnson's conduct was consistent with SEC rules and regulations as they then existed," Pomerantz said.

In addition, Pomerantz pointed out that Johnson was hardly the only analyst to invest in private companies related to his coverage area.

"I have no idea why (Johnson) was sued and (others) have not been," Pomerantz said.

The deal with FleetBoston also resolves a related action by the NASD.

"We are very pleased . . . to get these matters behind us," said FleetBoston spokesman James Mahoney, adding that the bank approached regulators about a settlement late last year.

E-mail Todd Wallack at twallack@sfchronicle.com.