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 : The New QLogic (ANCR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: janski who wrote (12843)	12/3/1997 12:39:00 AM
From: Ken Richard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29386

<<<And all the while the board members continue to unload their shares>>>> We may be fools for holding on (though I very highly doubt it), but this is the most unjustifiedly ignorant comment I have seen on this board in months. How many times does someone have to post that former board members are ON A PROGRAMED SELL EVERY MONTH REGARDLESS OF THE PRICE !! ??

To: janski who wrote (12843)	12/3/1997 3:36:00 AM
From: Kerry Lee	Respond to of 29386

Janski, I enjoyed reading your latest contributions. Here's my response ( spread over 2 posts ): <<Kerry, I remember your warnings about Nuko very well and you were right about them. So? Anyway, regarding my Ancor reservations: I do not believe anything management of this company says they are doing untill I see results. It was Cal Nelson who during the Q2 conference call made it look like Ancor was about to have just about a profitable Q3. That was after an 'honest proclamation' that they will 'show us the money' and any hype is forever gone. Nothing different about what he did and Steve O. claiming at one time to have first profitable Q in Q4 of 96(I think he said that on CNBC). I am not even saying he(Cal) did it deliberatly although I do consider it a possibility. If he miscalculated then he is simply incompetent.>> Cal was justifiably feeling bullish about the Q3 and Q4 prospects at the time, based on materially important/record bookings in Q3 and feedback he was getting from his salesforce on some large orders expected which obviously failed to materialize in time for the Q3 conference call. The reason is apparently a timing issue with a very large Uncle Sam order which is looking like it will fall in Q1 1998 instead of Q4 1997 due to budget constraints ( see today's Cabletron warning and reasons given for shortfall ). It is not surprising that forecasting sales in an emerging technology is a crapshoot, as witnessed by other FC players like Ciprico and Emulex. It is not totally surprising that end users might drag their feet when the choices ( GE, ATM, etc..) are confusing and overwhelming in datacomm. Regarding "incompetence", I assume you are lumping Cal Nelson in with the others who missed estimates by a country mile, ie, the CEO's of ASND,FORE, CS and even Boeing. Not surprisingly. all these companies who have disappointed all face shareholder lawsuits. What's new? What Steve O said on CNBC over a year ago is irrelevent today and is up to the litigators/courts to decide. Steve O was not up to the task and was removed as CEO. <<How am I supposed to trust that their OEM efforts are going to ever come to fruition? You are telling me that it is all going on at the level of decision makers and it is none of my business.>> Trust no one except your mother. I'm not telling you anything about your business. If you do not believe that Ancor will win at least 20-30% of the potential FC switch market, then take your ANCR tax losses like a man and wait until 1998 for Brocade's IPO. If your "research" on the worldwide web leads you to believe that Brocade will "dominate" the FC switch category with at least a 70-80% market share, then SHORT ANCR on the basis that you can pick up 5 easy points when they shut the doors. Certainly that trading strategy worked on NUKO didn't it?

To: janski who wrote (12843)	12/3/1997 8:05:00 AM
From: Neil S	Respond to of 29386

janski: <<It was Cal Nelson who during the Q2 conference call made it look like Ancor was about to have just about a profitable Q3.>> I think this statement is an unfair characterization. Breakeven revenue for Q3 was~ $6.5-6.8m, assuming no write offs. If someone extrapolated the reported first months sales of ~$2.8 to be a run-rate for the quarter, then that was their own assumption, and it was in no way implied by anything i heard in the call. I know i sure didn't assume it would be a profitable quarter. Neil