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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kai-Uwe who wrote (10041)	12/3/1997 1:10:00 AM
From: hpeace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

Kai, that isn't 70% and 55% would be a closer number to the number I had.I actually think that about 60% would mean it's not even 60%.. these are the words they used. (about 60% of consumer sales in Q3) the issue never was cpq didn't have great sub k. I said that before anyone on this thread. the issue is the wild exageration that is going on when they say cpq is this or dell is that..... CPQ NEVER HAD 70% OF THE 3Q SALES AND i DON'T THINK THEY HAD 60%.... but, they started off with slow in july and the other two mnths couldn't pull them up to 70%. that was the contention all along... several of the news releases inferred that cpq high %'s for the qtr that weren't there.. So, do you think it was 70% or not?????? JIm does????????? sO, i ASK YOU....DO YOU THINK CPQ EVEN HAD 60% OF SALES... which would mean that you think they got more than this article infers. The only number I can believe in this is if cpq said they had 70% sales increses in october. I would buy that number if cpq said it... I might doubt it alittle if someone else said it. and the noveber number being strong too says cpq will grow at 60% this qtr?????? My next issue is this.... Jimbo and meathead will spend 100 posts now saying that cpq didn't grow that much in october<ggg> and I will spend zero posts saying that they did. just like I spent zero posts saying that cpq had 70% of 3q when it isn't correct. and even this article infers it isn't even 60%..... I wait for the HQ and the IDC and the dataqusest, which on history are fairly close... and the other stuff i don't weight much unless cpq says it. will jim ever admit he was wrong about the 70% becasue this article says they did almost 60%.... never... will he deny that cpq grew 70% in october...of course...

To: Kai-Uwe who wrote (10041)	12/3/1997 1:23:00 AM
From: hpeace	Respond to of 97611

now, that jimbo spent all those post on the obvious, that is cpq was losing market share in the sub 1k... he'll have to backtrack all that... since any statisticain would now deduce that if they are still losing market share in the sub k and unit growth is as high as cpq said. that the ASP has got to be up..... and they are selling higher priced and less of the sub k.... so, all those post jimbo and meathead made on cpq losing market share really just works against him... heck, we posted the market share news last week. So, if sales are so strong like this says and it isn't sub k.... then what are they selling....is there a new catagory called a $100 pc and it must be those $100 pc's that cpq is selling and so cpq will not be okay...becasue the sub k is down and the above k is down and it's all the 100 dollar pc's that is causing the tremendous growth<ggggggggg> now watch those two invent some kind of new math to make things work out to just like they want them.... but, then the idc comes out and they are the fools again , just like they were the fools on the laast idc.... In july I started saying that cpq would blow dell away in 3q... they drummed me off the thread... then when cpq did...they said..oh..that's obviuos...<ggg> so, let them blow... the qtrly reports will keep them honest. But, know this...one strumble by dell or cpq and the stk falls 50%...