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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mikeslemmer who wrote (17014)	5/8/2003 4:30:01 PM
From: Wallace Rivers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78525

Does anyone have an opinion on, or knowledge of the Stanley Works (SWK)? It's trading near a 52 week low, yields north of 4%. Raised dividends every year as far back as my array goes (10 years plus). Results lately have been pretty punk, which surprises me given how strong the housing market has been. For the time being, just looking. May be a great brand name on the cheap, but the same could have been said for Xerox and many others.

To: mikeslemmer who wrote (17014)	5/8/2003 4:51:46 PM
From: Bob Rudd	Respond to of 78525

mikeslemmer: Licensing vs battling: I gotta believe it would be more fun and profitable to be the 'Dolby' of Video Conferencing, licensing to one or more VC players who already have the other elements in place than to spend to duplicate those elements while trying to make a diverse global market aware of your advantages...which may be offset by weaknesses in other elements of the total homegrown package. Here's some of the outfits that believe(d) they offer a technological advantage: quote.yahoo.com and that doesn't include private firms like Tandberg [big like PLCM] and non VC companies like MSFT. Your points on VC and Webex are well taken. My collective position in VC [~80/20 PLCM/WEBX] is well less than 1% because I agree that the premise is largely growth based and quite speculative. The 'value' element is that both have been beaten up yet both are leaders in what could be a much larger business and both are financially solid with significant net cash. I see SARS as a substantial catalyst that I'm not really paying a premium for. Technology vs marketing/position: It's an interesting strategic issue with several moving parts - To what extent does the new technology address needs the customers are aware of better than existing solutions? Are there switching costs/risks? Are customers aware of the new technology? Wired-in tech buyers get the news fast, business people in diverse locations who don't follow technology closely...it takes awhile. In the meantime, R&D at the leaders and their supplier's look for ways around patents to duplicate or exceed the innovators edge before it gains a foothold.