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 : 3Com Corporation (COMS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig crawford who wrote (11692)	12/5/1997 10:22:00 PM
From: Mang Cheng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45548

Criag, I knew it all along. You faked your hash and impolite tone before in all your previous posts to irate and stimulate ! The post you just posted was extremely well written and one of the best analysis of COMS' financial statement I have ever seen on this thread. Bascially all that you said are correct and I have missed most of them causing me to lose money in coms right now. But going forward is a different story - it will still be very volatile but with an upward bias - in my opinion. Mang

To: craig crawford who wrote (11692)	12/5/1997 11:01:00 PM
From: Jeff Briley	Respond to of 45548

Craig, Excellent analysis... was going to work through that myself tonight, but you saved me some time. For those of you who are saying that "the earnings announcement is built into the price", I see it differently. COMS was in the $35 range before this announcement was even made. Then the announcement came and the stock got shorted to the max. I know that the shorts came in hard and heavy, because there were no shares left to short the day after the announcement (tried through several brokers) . As most of you know, short sellers are usually much more short term focused than longs in general. Thus, when the stock gapped down huge all of the shorts started covering and gave it a "short squeeze" right back up to where it started. The announcement had no net effect. Then we had today where some "fluff" news came out. Yes, I consider it fluff news because it's still the same company today as it was yesterday. Everything said about COMS today was already known. This coupled with a strong market gave it some upward momentum. For those of you who have CNBC on every day in their office --- How many times have we heard Joe Kernan talk about a stock tanking after they release earnings after they had already pre-warned weeks before?? Joe always says, "I don't get it, this happens every time. The company pre-warned this was coming." Let me pose this question... If they were releasing earnings tomorrow, would you have sold today?? That is why this one should trend down until earnings. This warning was huge!! They're gonna show a small profit?? That's nuts!! If you really want to go long, buy this one in January. Jeff

To: craig crawford who wrote (11692)	12/6/1997 12:25:00 AM
From: Wayne Lian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45548

Craig, great post. You are doing the public a favor. Some longs might not like to hear this because they are afraid this can affect the share price. But I must say you are bringing the truth to light. It might even be crimal what coms and usrx managment have done, misleading the shareholders, making misrepresentation, while conducting insider sales. The just announced lawsuit does not touch them. Eventually is the shareholders who pay for the mistakes, crime, and stupity of the managers. I wish they sue them personally.

To: craig crawford who wrote (11692)	12/6/1997 3:13:00 PM
From: Thomas Haegin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45548

Re: USRX Craig, at the risk of unneccessarily bringing up an old topic. Very briefly: In JYHO, was the USRX aquisition a bad idea to start with or was it just executed and/or timed badly and COMS did not look at USRX hard enough during their due diligence? Would you look more positively at COMS today if they had refrained from the USRX take-over? Thanks, Thomas