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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (23530)	11/29/1997 2:35:00 PM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 176387

Paul, Thanks for pointing out the spuriousness of the purchased information. What do you think about the cannibalization posting by Kai Uwe? Does CPQ have a margin problem in the desktop area? Also, it seems to me that comparing gross margins alone is not a fair estimate of the unit cost since it neglects the operating cost contribution. When comparing these costs and margins it seems that the total costs have to be allocated on a per unit basis. Incidently, the new Packard Bell and HWP offering in the low end of the PC market are much more attractive than the "black box" offered by CPQ. No wonder they have seized so much marketshare from CPQ. The retail salesman I talked to about these units referred to them as "throwaway PC's" because of the in ability to upgrade or configure them. The rapid loss of marketshare demonstrates the lack of any meaningful brand loyalty to CPQ. Regards, Jim Kelley

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (23530)	11/29/1997 3:42:00 PM
From: hpeace	Respond to of 176387

paul, not true... Many of these firms have ex-Vp's or Directors of purchasing and Mfg'ing as consultants. And, Marketing directors and VP's.. these cost can be determined. Heck, when I left cpq in 1993 , I signed certain contracts that prohibited me from doing some things in order to get a almost 7 figure bye bye package with the stk I got.... But, none of the statements prohibited me from saying that at the time in 1993 that cost were so and so and mat'l's were 95% of the cost and labor 1% and burden 4%, and the lowest teir one price was this or that. And, gross margins per model were this. Absolutely nothing.Absolutely nothing.... I've seen some of these reports as the MIS mgr at cpq from the beginning to 1993... it would blow me away how accurate some of the info. was.. The city of Austin transit Authority commisioned a firm to create a purchsing std. operating procedures(sop) book. The firm comes back later and collects their money ..100k (something like that). Well, later on they discover that with few exceptions it looks just like the City of Dallas transit authority sop book. In some cases they overlooked some things and left the Dallas Tansit Authority's name in the manual<gggg> All I can say..is I've seen the numbers we are talking about and I've seen research firm put reports together.... It's uncanny. But, these reports are very very expensive. Look at the cost of ARS or IDC or Dataquest or HQ research. Any of these firms can have a hit and miss track record on future. But, they are uncanny when it's history...too uncanny to be using voodoo and gypsies<gggg> These costs can be detemined and bought on the open market.