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 : Osicom(FIBR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig crawford who wrote (5715)	3/6/1998 8:18:00 AM
From: ChrisJP	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10479

Craig, I have no intentions of taking sides on this one, but let me say first that based on the rhetoric and spin I have seen here in the last 18 hours, I believe many of you are desperately needed at the White House ! I cannot respond to every claim, so I will only post a few. IMO, the market's gonna do what its gonna do, but the basis for some of the arguments here and the twisted interpretation/representation of CC statements border on hilarious. First NASA. Many companies lend equipment to agencies like NASA because NASA's network environment is very demanding and represents an excellent field test. More importantly, it gives the company bragging rights "Used by NASA". Kind of like Tang. So please give up on the NASA item. Second WCOM. News flash ! CIEN just recently announced that WCOM has delayed (cancelled) some orders. That's what send CIEN into the dumper. Maybe the reason WCOM changed their purchasing plans with CIEN is that they found a better product to buy. Third. My favorite shorter's argument I read came from the Yahoo thread. The poster brought attention to the bad news that inventories were down ! Sorry to say that in any business I've ever seen, lower inventories is a positive indicator. Products are moving and expense of carrying items is less. This is not to say the shorts may have some valid concerns regarding FIBR's balance sheet and perhaps their credibility. But most of the arguments outside of balance sheet related ones are the lamest I've read in a while. Regards, Chris

To: craig crawford who wrote (5715)	3/6/1998 8:32:00 AM
From: Eddy Blinker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10479

promises..promises... Sir The bet I venture to lay is that YOU and some of YOUR cronies "will" disappear within 12 month from sites like these anyways. So enjoy your existence in slime feeding. And take a bath in your own excrements as well while you have the opportunity. ED

To: craig crawford who wrote (5715)	3/6/1998 9:25:00 AM
From: David Pawlak	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10479

>>You have gone from touting BFPT deployment of the Gigamux to saying deployment within 3 months. Sounds like your whistling a different tune, David. You and others led people to believe that there were Gigamux's deployed in BFPT's network, INSTALLED, FUNCTIONING and OPERATING RIGHT NOW.<< Craig, I believe that it will be deployed a lot sooner than 3 months. The reason that I am going out as far as 3 months is because by that time I should have no problem being able to prove it to you. I haven't listened to the conference again, but I could have swore that this person you are referring to about NASA was a private investor.