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.

Non-Tech : Any info about Iomega (IOM)? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 9:42:00 AM
From: Spank	Respond to of 58324

pssst! I heard Quigley was looking to buyout Iomega... (gotta get these rumors started sometime!) I was thinking about Darrell yesterday--what was his call about seeing, what was it? 17 before 34? (don't recall exactly) I'd like to hear something from him too. All you folks asking DR IOMEGA to identify himself--why bother? Gottfried was right--he might as well be his dog. If not, he's at least a son-of-a-bitch, and if he had innocent intentions, then he's just a poor dumb son-of-a-bitch. Who knows if he's even with the company, if he is, who's to say he's not the phone guy or the groundskeeper, or some guy who was promoted to the level of his own incompetence. Whoever he is, if he tried (being non-cynical here) to help us as best he could--oh well. "It's not the things you don't know that hurt you, it's the things you do know that ain't so..."--Mark Twain I read something on another thread--some wacky shorters spreading a bunch of crap all over the stock generated the observation by a long-time SI denizen: Everyone in this forum has his/her own agenda. (IOM "Condor" commercial on cnn right now--it's ok--I like the Scorcesian camera work but think the metaphor is poor) For me, it seems like this is a good place to get the latest releases, price/volume analysis (Thanks Gary!), T/A stuff, gobbets of trading wisdom, and channel check/real world company anecdotes. As for people's opinions (not data) and cheerleading, well, that goes into a different hopper for me now. Yeesh now I'm babbling... (nothing new, I know) -Spank

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 9:49:00 AM
From: Teddy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

RE: "I will be going to the shareholder meeting and will express my concerns if I am allowed to do so." Most likely there will be metal detecters at the door to prevent shareholders from "expressing" theirselves.<g> Truff, do you think you are getting a little emotional about this whole thing? Maybe its time to take the loss and move on. $10 and i'm out of here. From what i have seen, The Street is not at all happy with IOM at this time, i would be surprised to see them change their mind (heard mentality) for at least 2 quarters. As for those that are looking of a buyout: a desperate prayer. It ain't gonna happen.

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 9:50:00 AM
From: Tom Gebing	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

Truff, excellent post....... but KE has mismanaged the shareholders, not the company. He is good at operations and marketing , but not a Wall Street CEO and never will be. The split was to take care of the employees, which showed no respect for the shareholders. I agree with you, now we have lost the luster with the big players and have become a so-so stock, that will be a trading investment until something new happens.. e.o.m.

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 10:01:00 AM
From: FBarron	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

This business of caring nothing about the stock price and shutting out the analyst/WS community should not be tolerated by shareholders. You'd be getting rid of the wrong guy IMO. Dunn is the one bearing this standard. KE is just enforcing the policy.

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 12:49:00 PM
From: stock bull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

Trufflette...you make some very good points in your posting. With respect to the institutional/mutual funds, your correct in saying that many are restricted from buying a stock under $10. As far as preannouncing a 2 cent miss from the estimate, I'm not so sure that a preannouncement was necessary as their financial performance was really very good. The stock did not tank because of the 2 cent miss, it was due to the outlook for the company as presented by KE. (Read my postings as of yesterday. I posted some interesting articles...one to read came from Reuters.) Now that the stock is trading below 10 dollars, IOM "may have" to consider a reverse split. This would halve the number of shares and double the price. However, IMO, the chances of this happening are nill. When the presplit announcement was made with the stock trading in the mid twenties range, I said they are doing the wrong thing. I think the stock is "dead" for the next two quarters. The analysts will want to see the results of the 100 million dollar adv. campaign, their ability to launch the new products during this quarter, the further impact of Asia, ability to continue to grow revenue and profits, the impact of growing competition, and the effectiveness of their efforts in cleaning up the parts shortages. If the preceeding goals aren't successfully achieved, IOM will be trading as a 2 dollar stock. What gets me is that KE sells his stock last year while planning on splitting the shares, knowing the full impact of increasing their OEM sales, etc, etc, He sure took care of himself, and I suspect his staff...shareholders be dammed. By the way, the increase in shares from the split were to be used, in part, for employee stock options and purchase plans. I guess the employees got screwed along with the rest of the shareholders. Wondering if there are grounds for a shareholder class action law suit? Any lawyers on this thread? Care to comment? I bought into IOM knowing that it was a risky investment. Now I consider IOM a very, very risky investment. So what am I going to do with my IOM stock? Well, I'm going to stay long. At this time, and for the next few months, I think the downside risk is minimal. If things don't work out as planned by IOM, I think we will see the stock tanking in the March timeframe. Good luck... Stock Bull

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 3:05:00 PM
From: Naggrachi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

<<We now have to deal with analysts who were not communicated with, are no doubt highly irritated, and who will take it out in the form of downgrades and advice to their clients to sell out, as their own credibility is at stake. >> If the analysts covering IOM were of the respectable kind, then I could certaily understand where you're coming from. However, the analysts that cover IOM are, in my opinion, the sleazy kind. I doubt they have that much influence, much less clients. H&Q is the only respectable one when compared to the rest. So if they're irretated or not, I could care less. Which only explains why KE thinks along the same lines. KE has a business to run not sit there and kiss the analysts ass this Q and when he has to face the music bail out. He's telling it like it is today, rather thann tomorrow. Zead

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 3:19:00 PM
From: D.J.Smyth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

truflette <<Finally, I wish very much that Darrell Smith would come here and make his comments on the recent events. Of all the posters on this forum, he had the best ability to analyze the company and trading in it and I would be very very interested in his opinion on the prospects going forward. Darrell, I know you read this board - please post your take on all of this - I know all of us would appreciate it.>> although i'm flattered, i don't see myself in this favorable light relative to iom. we did not own iom on this recent fall as we were warned of the possibility of a fall, and i tried to alert earlier but was called a "broker". we'll be looking to move back into iom on the long side when another price target appears. iom missed earnings because of an increase in sg@a and research which cost iom $.04. i'll write more when time is available. the market is a "little bear" market in our view (hopefully the bear won't grow up). but there is one company of which i'm aware which may have additional upside, although the volatility may continue in its court. the company is, surprisingly dell. again. this is not my idea, but was given to me by a reliable source. we'll see. it's hard to trust much isn't it.

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/24/1998 5:28:00 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

Trufflette- <<S.B. My take is much the same as Gary's - that KE has mismanaged the company and either has to take big and immediate steps to enhance shareholder value or has to go.>> WOW! What a ludicrous comment. Here is a guy that 2 years ago brought the company back from virtual oblivion, redesigned their product, revolutionized the industry, made more money than anyone thought possible for this company and, this quarter, virtually double earnings AND you want to trash him. I cannot believe you. Hey, we are all devastated by the stock drop! I am concerned that it portends more than meets the eye, but... what a fair weather friend you are to predict the guy's demise! Perhaps the street expected too much....and, just maybe they are again wrong to trash this fine company now! Time will tell, but I think an IOM w/out KE is far worse off!! Mike

To: KM who wrote (45301)	1/25/1998 2:34:00 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

>>I am utterly dismayed that the company did not preannounce or give lower guidance to the investment community as soon as it became obvious to them that the quarter was not going as expected. We now have to deal with analysts who were not communicated with, are no doubt highly irritated, and who will take it out in the form of downgrades and advice to their clients to sell out, as their own credibility is at stake.<< Trufflette - I know I'm responding way after the fact, so no doubt some people have already defended KE to you. I won't do that. I just wonder whether a pre-announcement, or guidance to analysts causing them to lower estimates, would have had any effect other than making this selloff happen sooner. I have been in this stock long enough to have seen the effect of even one lowered estimate. The post to which I am responding now does contain a lot of very good points, including the one about the Street not being kindly disposed to this stock. Of course, the Motley Fool is more responsible for that than anything, since when they first started getting a lot of attention, they openly said they were smarter than everyone on Wall Street, because they knew Iomega was a great buy and the hot-shot analysts didn't. Of course, Kim Edward's "who cares about the stock price, I'm busy building the company" stance hasn't really helped. I will say, at the risk of being repetitive on this point, that when the split was announced it wasn't quite as crazy as it seems now. At that point, the board felt that they had a blockbuster quarter going, and the stock had momentum. The stock looked like it was heading into the mid-thirties at the time that the split decision must have been reached. Yes, it's weird to split a stock in the thirties, but we have no reason to think that the board knew the company would miss its numbers for the quarter. And as long as I'm already beating this point into the ground, I'd like to point out that the decision to split was not Kim Edwards' alone. The entire board must vote to approve a split. Another really good point in your post is that the stock was finally starting to get some respect, and here we are back in the same position we were in last January. Low price, low expectations, and no respect. For that I think KE and the board share the blame. I also believe that if the company executes well over the next six months, ships all announced products and turns in two great quarters in a row, the respect will start to come back. But it has to start with the company beating the CURRENT estimates for this quarter, not the lowered estimates which are surely forthcoming. It would be better if they beat this quarter's numbers, though perhaps I am insane even to hope for that. - Allen