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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 10:09:00 AM
From: Riskmgmt	Respond to of 64865

Thomas: That was a lot of work that you did writing up the CC. On behalf of all on this thread I would like to say a big Thank you very much. Regards, Ray

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: Alan Slife	Respond to of 64865

Thomas, Thanks for the update To Sunw: In this age of investor responsibility for our own actions, why are we not allowed to listen to the conference call after the fact? Many smaller companies make this available to shareholders and all interested parties. Maybe we should pepper IR with calls so they get the message. I'm at a loss to figure out why infomation has to be filtered through analysists and not the people who own the company. On MLK Day the shareholders sure are being treated as second hand citizens. (Have I missed the location for the CC? If so I take it all back<gggg> Alan

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 11:15:00 AM
From: Beachbumm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Thomas, that was really nice effort for the benefit of the thread. Our thanks to you. You know, I was just kicking some numbers around in my mostly empty head this a.m. and think about it: We might see 8% earnings growth in the S&P in '98 and the market is willing to pay 17-20 times earnings for this. SUNW, on the other hand, will have earnings growth of 17-20% and yet gets a p.e. in the low 20s or not much better than that of the overall market. It's pathetic. And an indication of how potentially undervalued this company is. Just my humble opinion, of course. Beachbumm

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 12:03:00 PM
From: H. Wai	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Thomas, What are the new Darlings? Thanks for your post. H.Wai

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 3:57:00 PM
From: Andy M.	Respond to of 64865

Thomas, Thanks a lot for your CC post. Andy

To: Thomas Haegin who wrote (7029)	1/19/1998 5:52:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 64865

Very much appreciate your extensive summary of the Conference Call. Considerable work for you and very helpful to this board - especially to those of us who own some SUNW stock and are long term investors. One statement in your summary struck me "I promised the SunW IR folks not to disclose the CC phone #" Was it actually someone in the Investors Relations Dept who made you promise to keep Sun stockholders - for whom Investors Relations is the conduit and alleged advocate - in the dark while informing "analysts" - the vast majority of whom (actually I assume almost all) are not rpt not stockholders. What kind of "Investors Relations 'folks' does Sun have? Who are they representing - investors? Apparently not. Why should people who write about the company (often negatively) have access to information and the views of Sun's leadership that is deliberately denied to Sun's own stockholders? Seems to me we stockholders should protest this directly to Sun management in the strongest possible terms. Note: I listened to the conference call in the fall and found it very valuable. The "analysts" reports were almost useless in comparison. While Sun may be legally able to treat its stockholders like second class citizens, seems like abject and absolute stupidity to do so. Stockholders are among the best "advertizers" Sun has, while analysts often distort and slant so that Sun comes out on the short end of the stick. Remember in the fall the chorus of disaster, when I, listening directly, knew that was not the case at all. We need to get a commitment from these "IR folks" whom made you promise secrecy to reverse this and permit individual stockholders (and others) access to the conference call after the next earnings report IMO. Comments? Action?