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 : Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (ACLS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lance Bredvold who wrote (156)	2/8/2006 6:16:24 PM
From: Lance Bredvold	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 195

That was an aborted post as my computer suddenly began paging down uncontrollably. What I was trying to point out though was that by the numbers in their PR today it appears that SEN revenues were unusually high last year or unusually low this year. The totals for royalties and 50% share annually were $44,959,000 in 04 and $24,560,000 in 05. During the CC today Steve predicted SEN income of $4-6mm quarterly for the next year and said it in such a way that it sounded like a high amount. No questioner seemed to question it, so I must somehow be missing something. And I was quite wrong on thinking they were more conservative as Mary sounded as breathless as ever. I have a difficult time keeping up with the various speakers. Each makes sense within their own sentences, but they all seem to me to speak a different language. For example, in the PR they listed something called "new system bookings with service revenues" and gave it as $98.8mm for the quarter. Yet when Steve reported the same number, he called it new orders. They seem to use "bookings" and "orders" interchangeably. And then they tell me there will be "shipments" of $60 to $70mm during the year 06 but that there will not be that much in revenues because a lot of the HD orders will not be recognized. Somehow it seems to me I could find a way to say that more simply--though I've not figured out how yet. It just seems they make the figures way more complex than necessary--and that each speaker uses words in a slightly different way. I've felt for some time that Steve is not straightforward as I've caught him saying things which are untrue and variable IMO. My guess is that Mary is not willing to control everyone enough to make the presentations coherent for me. I keep hearing things which make sense but then when I compare the implications of what one person said I find it conflicts with what someone else said and I think the analysts have a similar problem. Weasels? Poor communicators? Loose cannons? Or am I all wrong? Best, L.