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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Phoenix who wrote (12525)	2/18/1998 2:45:00 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 77400

<< You're always so negative >> Oh really? How would you know? << Well, I expect that from you... after all you've always been on the short side of this pup >> Wrong again. I'd like to see you prove that. I have been long C$CO far more often than I have been short. << Are you still hoping for a pull back >> No, I'm hoping C$CO goes to 200 while I'm short. << EPS estimates for the year are between $1.69 and $1.77 of which .92 is in the bag already >> So if C$CO has 0.92 in the first 2 Q's of 1998 and they are supposed to earn $1.69-1.77 for the year (I'll use the higher $1.77 number) that would leave a balance of 0.85 cents. Considering how C$CO earned 0.92 in the first half you are expecting C$CO to earn less money in the second half than they did in the first? How can they justify your PE of 50 with that kind of "growth". << I should add that Cisco was one of very few networkers that hit their earnings estimates in the face of this weakness >> That's because they report a month or two later than the other networkers so analysts have plenty of time to hack the numbers when they see crumby numbers from the rest. << So I would have every expectation that they will not dissappoint going forward >> Of course they will not disappoint. Analysts keep lowering the bar so they can look brilliant for making the numbers. The numbers keep getting worse and worse though. << Second from FY96 to FY97 CISCO saw a 57% increase in revenues. >> Yeah, back then I thought C$CO was a good buy. At the rate C$CO is going now they will increase revenues only half that 57% increase for 1997==>1998. << They haven't disappointed for, what is it now, 38 quarters straight? >> That would depend on what you consider "disappointed". They have disappointed the street before but probably not by your definition. << Third, yes it's true that CSCO revenues have increased at a slower 30% rate for the first two quarters of 98 >> Try 26.6% for the last Q. The quarter before that was a 30.2% revenue gain. exchange2000.com That would be an average of around 28.4% revenue growth for the first 2 quarters of 1998, not 30%. Furthermore it is slowing, like I said 26.6% for the latest Q. Their EPS gains were even worse. Only up 26% for the first 2 quarters of 1998. Can we expect revenue growth of only 20% for next quarter? << Craig, not only do I think these numbers are WELL within reach I think Cisco betters the $9B revenue mark this year. I base this on a return to spending in the RBOC's, overseas, more internet purchases, acquisitions, further penetration into new markets such as data/voice, and RAS, and continued dominance in traditional markets... oh and yes, CSCO has delivered on Granite now >> I see. The economy is going to just keep on growing at the same pace that it has right up through 2000. There will be no setbacks, recessions, crisis, etc. You are too complacent my friend. That always happens near the end of an economic expansion. It has been so long since we have had a slowdown in our economy that people forget that they can even occur. << So Craig, it is you that can "flap your jaws" all you want, but that you can not take John's success away from him (as if you could do better). >> First of all I never sais that John Chambers wasn't capable or successfull at running C$CO. My problem is C$CO has not delivered on it's promises as of late yet the street bids the stock up anyway. I have no problem with the job Chambers is doing, I just have a problem with the street who buys into the promises, and then doesn't care when they aren't delivered on. Second of all what does my capabilites of running Cisco have to do with anything? Are you saying that you shouldn't short companies who have CEO's that are more capable than yourself? What a stupid argument. All of the CEO's that drove AAPL into the ground are more capable than me. If I would have been running Apple I would have ran it into the ground in one month rather than several years. It was still a good short even with more competent CEO's than me. Using your logic I suppose none of us have the right to criticize the president because we couldn't do any better, correct? Do you think you could do a better job than Clinton? How about if Dole won? I suppose you think that you could do a better job than him as well. << but dissing John holds no water whatsoever. >> I merely pointed out that Mr. Chambers hasn't delivered on his promises yet the street acts as if he has, pushing Cisco higher.