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: sheila rothstein who wrote (47188)	2/8/1998 11:43:00 AM
From: FBarron	Respond to of 58324

<<The CEO made a major BLUNDER< You keep saying that, but I haven't heard any substantiation yet.

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (47188)	2/8/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: Rocky Reid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

Iomega investors are by definition "Emotional Investors." The mindset that would jump into a risky stock like this entails a certain amount of emotion, bravado, and mania. Does anyone here really think that they have just discovered this secret little gem of a company, with a fantastic story involving Zips replacing 1.44MB floppies, and somehow have outsmarted the armies of Brokers and Mutual Funds who choose to ignore IOM? Please. Everyone and their grandmother who has money in this market knows about this company, and also knows that this Zip story is now 2 years out of date. Some Iomega investors who show up on these threads only now have made this Zip discovery, and think they have an exclusive on insight. Sad. This Q is already about 1/2 over, and still no Buz. No Jaz2. No Vapor!. No nothing, except an aging 100MB Zip, and a Jaz line that grew only 7% last year. Expect the Jaz line to actually record a sales decrease this year. Because of the soon to be released 4.7 Gig Quest, the possible Orb problem, and the present SparQ bargain, Jaz cannot be counted on to contribute positively to Iomega's overall earnings growth. It is too expensive. But, if they lower the price, margins are hurt. Catch 22-- but back to the point. The point is, there is no exclusive on the Zip story. The Street has heard about it, and evidently remains unimpressed. Anyone here who thinks they know something The Street doesn't, is just kidding themselves. Emotion can be a dangerous thing. It can blind you, it can cause you to see illusions, it can distort reality. Anyone who thinks that Iomega can sustain a growth rate, thereby supporting a high PE, needs to send out a distress call to Reality Station. Pronto.

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (47188)	2/8/1998 12:14:00 PM
From: isdsms	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

...despite IOM I made a 25% profit from my portfolio in 1997. SR Sheila, May I suggest Janus Special Situations Fund. It was up apprx. 45% Sincerely, Ira

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (47188)	2/8/1998 12:22:00 PM
From: Neil Kalton	Respond to of 58324

Sheila, After reading the CC transcript and the numerous posts on this thread I still don't see how Kim Edwards made a big blunder. IMO, he was forthright and honest about IOM's strategy for the upcoming year. He conveyed both the positive potentials and the risks inherent with such a strategy. What more, as investors, do we want besides honesty from our CEO's. I would rather have a CEO who is forthright than have one who is a cheerleader always trying to hype the company in an effort to "enhance shareholder value". KE laid the cards squarely on the table. If you don't believe in the strategy then sell, if you're like me and think it is a well calculated risk then hold on. If the strategy works then the share price will take care of itself eventually. As Peter Lynch said, it often took his stocks 2 or 3 years after buying before they behaved in the manner he had expected them to. IMO, the only people who committed any blunders were the ones who sold at $8. That low share price was a classic example of how the financial markets can often be inefficient in the short term. The savvy investors capitalize on such short term inefficiencies (witness ORCL at $18). Unless you're a short term player there is no need for KE to issue any statements about the co. While the markets may display short term inefficiencies they are always efficient in the long run, i.e., if IOM executes its strategy and increases profitability then the share price will take care of itself. IMO, Iomega has adopted a strategy which conveys the company's desire to be around for some time to come. With each commercial that plays to millions of people Iomega is increasing its brand awareness. Sure, the increased advertising may stunt profit growth over the next year (which KE told us about) but it may work wonders to ensure IOM's longer term viability. As long as the fundamental story remains in tact I plan on being patient and being around to reap these rewards. -nk (BTW, you shouldn't have to defend yourself by posting your investment returns)

To: sheila rothstein who wrote (47188)	2/8/1998 12:38:00 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

I never said anything about females knowing or not knowing about investing. I was specifically talking about my MALE friend who's an M.D. not knowing anything about investing. As far as your 25% gain last year, that's great, but not stellar. One of my mutual funds earned 36.6% last year and I only earned 29.7% on money I have in my E-Trade account. So what that tells me is that you and I and all of us on this thread may think we're all experts, but we're not. If we're making money, chances are the market is doing pretty well too. The only reason people like you and me play with individual stocks instead of (or in addition to) mutual funds is that we like to not only gamble but to have a feeling that we are pretty smart. More power to us.