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 : Y2K (Year 2000) Stocks: An Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: paul e thomas who wrote (7588)	11/5/1997 8:12:00 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13949

Paul, incorrect. First, the issue of terminal value is addressed explicit in my analysis. I never implied earnings would stop in 2000. Second, I clearly stated that I do not follow IMRS and for everyone to use their own estimates for earnings in '98 & '99 and revenue for '00. Third, the major "error" in my analysis is that the discount rate is too low. But I was trying to be generous. Fourth, any analyst who thinks IMRS will continue to grow at 42% per year over the next 5 years is an amateur or worse. Fifth and most enjoyable: Not a serious Financial Analyst? I'll pass that one on ... Good Luck with your investments. Bill

To: paul e thomas who wrote (7588)	11/6/1997 1:48:00 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 13949

Paul et al: ....my $.02.... In addition to your views, which I appreciate a great deal, I would add my own more emotional spin on current events. Suppose big money has become somewhat skittish about certain Y2K stocks, not to mention the sector, based on an analysis of post-2000 prospects, combined with general market caution. This, combined with your point about sequential earnings, would explain recent action in IMRS, PTUS, SEEC, ACLY and others which are languishing or drifting down or not performing according to expectations. Those companies that are licensing their software, cannot expect to appreciate until and unless significant licensing revenue appears, as has been said. That is why SEEC, despite sharp revenue and earnings growth, has not responded. It failed to show growth in licensing revenues. ACLY may have been expecting a more significant pop on the UIS/Australia news, but since we don't have a handle on the potential size of that deal, buyers may remain on the sidelines. For the same reason, IAIC languishes in the teens. As far as IMRS is concerned, do we see increased revenues and earnings growth COMBINED with a decrease in dependency on Y2K business? No, not yet. And if we don't see that in a couple of quarters, IMRS may be in trouble, price-wise. The very features of CBSL, low % of Y2K business and low margins, that made it initially unattractive to Mad Monk, have now become its virtues(rising margins notwithstanding) The perception of CBSL is that they are less dependent on Y2K business. IMO, missing analyst projections is not the whole story. It is sobering to consider that even with significant licensing revenues, if we don't see simultaneous signs of strong post-2000 performance, we may never see the panic buying that has been projected here so often. What to do? Taoman (buy more TPRO)