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 : Siebel Systems (SEBL) - strong buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Melissa McAuliffe who wrote (1229)	3/11/1998 3:42:00 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

Hi Melissa: Sorry to jump in here. I certainly can offer an opinion, albeit not an unbiased one. Seibel's position is that the customer will not have to worry about product integration, because they will make it seamless and painless. All current products and customizations will be carried forward, from both product lines. The combined companies, he says, will be in a position to do this, based on their larger combined size and resources. I must say that I have heard great things about Mr Seibel as a salesman. Mr Seibel has presented this integration as straightforward, and beneficial to all new and existing customers. At a high level, he tells a compelling story. But, as always, the devil is in the details. I have previously posted my opinions as to the technical challenges are: I will not reiterate them here. We will just have to wait to see how it plays out. What I would like to comment on is some of the reaction I am hearing on these threads. A good number of people have a healthy skeptism as to SEBL's ability to pull this product integration off. These investors either decide the risk is too high, and get out. Other assume that risk and hold/buy. To this group (which I will call 'Heads Up' group, I say: bully, Go for it, more power, etc. Go with your instincts, gauge the risk, and proceed with the best of luck. However, another possibly larger number of people seem to have the attitude of "they've done great up to now, therefore I believe they can pull it off" (an inductive proof of continued success?) Still others say "they must know what they're doing/they must have considered the integration challenges and licked them". This group will be called the 'Heads Off' group. To these people, my advise is to listen to the first group. The product integration issues are real, tough, and risky. If you don't think the product integration issues are key, or are in denial about this, your are in the 'Heads Off' group. If you do wake up and join the 'Heads Up', then go back to the beginning of the process and reconsider your investment in that light. Specifically of concern is the group of SCOP investors who were not pleased with the company and view Tom Seibel as the white knight savior of their portfolio. He may well be (certainly if you were underwater at $20+), but realize that your investment has undergone a significant change. You have traded an underperformer for an overperformer, with the associated risk and huge PE. If you're ok with that, I'm ok with that <g>. If SEBL reaches $100/share, you can buy me lunch. Trader Dave makes the best point in these posts. From an investor perspective, it is best for ALL the major players to continue to have a high degree of success. Institutions have been scared off in the past by 'blowups' at CLFY and SCOP. One interesting point: companies in this space have been warned off (by some fund managers) from beating the drum about 'replacement accounts' (where you have replaced your competitor). Why? Because when we emphasis these replacements, we are implying that the market is smaller than we say and we need to generate revenue by going after established accounts (at decidedly lower profits). The best of all worlds is for each of the remaining companies to continue their growth as further proof that this market is really as big as we claim. The front office market is potentially 2-3x the size of the back office market; plenty of room for the current players even with some presence from the ERPs. Keep those Heads Up.