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 : Red Brick Systems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Observer who wrote (162)	2/3/1998 12:15:00 PM
From: Mark Finger	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 304

>>If you look at REDB's web site, all their white papers are 18 months >>old, from 1996. They're still gloating over their 1995-96 prowess. >>There is not a single white paper from 1997 or 98. So, the question >>is, how differentiated are they today? The answer is that they aren't. In fact they are now in a trailing position in many ways. 1. They have a single purpose engine--data warehousing in small sizes (under 100G) and must be suitable for star architecture. 2. No ROLAP (IFMX) or MDBMS (Oracle) support. 3. How many partners (VAR's) do they have to help set up the systems? Compare to the many VAR's supporting ORCL, IFMX and SYBS warehousing with additional capability. 4. ORCL and IFMX match the the prime point of Red Brick architecture with their new index types (multi-table join) in their latest releases. 5. ORCL and IFMX support more hardware types (MPP, clusters, NUMA architecture), especially for larger warehouses. 6. Really take a careful look at Sybase IQ. That is a very nice product that is designed for areas where Red Brick does not compete, and can compete well in some areas that are not the best for Red Brick. Summary: Red Brick has seen their primary area matched, and the competitors ahead in other areas. What does that mean for the long run. Consider carefully.

To: Observer who wrote (162)	2/3/1998 1:17:00 PM
From: Smilodon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 304

The Pain Webber analyst mentioned Microsoft as the most likely candidate to buy REDB, but didn't think this would happen. I asked the CEO about a takeover a few months ago, and while he said they would consider it at the right price, that wasn't the direction they expected to go. The Pain Webber analyst cut numbers because the company guided him that way. I don't have the report anymore, but basically the company forecast 20% growth in revenue, with greater increases in sales force and R&D expenses. They also forcast seasonal slowness in Q1. The PW analyst was very upset as this guidance seemed to contradict the general message he had been given a few days before. I think much of the recent decline is due to the PW clients who bought in early January, dumping their shares. I think 5 is probably the bottom. It bottomed here in spring of 97. The company has a large cash position (more than $2 per share I think) and still seems to be growing revenue at 20%. While a lot of growth is in consulting and services, the company claims that this is the result of the market shifting to more of a solutions market versus a technology market. Hence the acquisition and increased services. Their new version is expected to ship soon. Also, as far as DataMarts and DataWarehouses are concerned, the company claims they are still basically the same thing and that much of their sales would be considered DataMarts. They see this wording as more marketing by competitors than any real difference. As you can see, I am getting most of my information from the company and am not an expert on the industry. I still hold my shares, due to the valuation. In my brief look at industry magazines, REDB seems to still be held in high regard for its technology. As long as it continues to grow, I will stick it out.