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.

Technology Stocks : Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KAD who wrote (3467)	6/10/2004 8:49:21 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4345

PCs and printers go hand in hand -- they share a lot of the same core technology, plus common distribution and marketing channels. Nonsense. What core technologies do PCs (Processor speed, graphics capability, low cost manufacturing skill set) share with printers (dots per inch, color, laser engines)? Dividing expenses like R&D and the cost of maintaining a global presence would add to the overall costs of doing business -- without adding any revenues. Wrong again - I don't think HPQ has a single R&D employee that is working on both the PC and printing products. The technologies of the two divisions is different, and the engineers are different as well. To experience full upside from a spinoff, investors might have to wait an awfully long time before the process is completed. Nonsense again. If HPQ were to spin out its printing division into a separate publicly traded company, and that new company's stock received a premium to LXK's multiple (deservedly so, since HPQ's printing division is 5x as large as LXK and more profitable), the new company would immediately be worth more than HPQ's current valuation. And shareholders would also have the remaining service and hardware division of HPQ (70% of revenue) as well. The shareholders could benefit IMMEDIATELY if the valuation of the printing division were recognized (it is undervalued today when it is buried in the rest of HPQ). Elroy

To: KAD who wrote (3467)	6/10/2004 11:15:16 AM
From: The Duke of URL©	Respond to of 4345

KAD- Memory does not serve me here, and perhap some can help here, but Steve Milunovich has been generally speaking, pretty good in his prognostications over the last 5 years or so. I can't remember if he was trying to be the "Axe" on Intel or Microsoft... or really much about his history. BUT, from the standpoint of moving the stock price short term, his comments are sensational and I would assume cause a bump up without getting Steve into trouble. But conceptually, real long term investors who look at advice like this with a grain of salt. In 95 or so, Walter came up with the exact 'hairbrained' scheme. This resulted in the spin off of Agilent. A move that while popping both stocks for a while (in this case about 5 years), historically speaking is questionable from a business viewpoint. What is truly dangerous are these opinions that have some surface reasonableness to them. They are much more dangerous than someone screaming "AOL is going to 1000" or some such. But, every good lie starts with a gravamen of truth.Url, Duke of, (2004)

To: KAD who wrote (3467)	6/10/2004 1:25:49 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4345

Merrill Lynch's Mr. Milunovich -- not to mention many Hewlett-Packard shareholders -- thinks something needs to be done to revive the shares. Agreed. But a spinoff is not the thing to do the trick. Us shareholders told Carly what we wanted done. We said Expense the damn options so giving them out is too expensive to continue taking OUR WEALTH and giving it to insiders who have done nothing to make our shares more valuable on the open market. She spat in our faces. This is why I got upset with her after being a supporter for so long. FWIW, I had no problem paying them 2% a year (through dilution) if they were making the stock price go up 20% a year... value for services rendered... well worth it. Kirk