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 : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Saul Feinberg Jr. who wrote (7987)	3/31/1998 8:06:00 PM
From: Sector Investor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42804

<<It is also true that competition from the big boys will only hurt and not help.>> This is just not true, Saul. The market for FE/GE enterprise ethernet switching is huge. MRVC's higher levels of integration and low cost structure will allow them to take business away from the big boys and make good profits at levels where BAY and CSCO can't match profitably. Also MRVC's customers are the ones to whom price/performance is more important than the Brandname. The more competition the better MRVC looks. Did you notice others like NN and CS are the ones having trouble competing, not MRVC. << But with all the stuff that needs to be done (e.g. fiber-optic connections for new neighborhoods, gigabit ethernet), some of which have not been standardized, I think the future for MRV is not as bleak as the current market valuation seems to suggest. >> Bleak? Bleak? Oh I get it. The price is too low, so the "all knowing" market knows things we don't, right? If things WERE bright the price would be up there, right, because the market is smart, right? The old somebody knows something we don't bit. Why don't you sell, if that's the way you feel? When the CFO comes out and says he is comfortable for $1.24 for all of 1998 (40% growth), before Q1 is 2/3 over, that can't be right, or the market would have taken us higher, right? Wrong, IMO. The 40% growth will turn out to be conservative. MRVC's future has NEVER looked brighter than now - and we needed sunglasses before.

To: Saul Feinberg Jr. who wrote (7987)	4/1/1998 1:15:00 AM
From: Richard Birecki	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42804

You said: > The question we have to ask ourselves is this: If someone > gives you $650 Million to compete with MRV, would > you take the offer? I'll gladly attempt competing with MRV if you would be willing to give me 600 million. Hell, keep the extra 50 as a discount for yourself. I'll set up office in Hawaii and the Swiss Alps in the winter. As you would be a shareholder (don't worry, I'll give you 100 shares or so) you can feel free to call and complain all you want on the phone about the day to day job we are doing. My sexy secretary will transfer you to my voice mail every time. Once in awhile, I will fax Schlomo a letter. "HEY Schlomo," it will state, "I'm competing with you." This is sure to keep MRVC on it's toes. Watch out world. Now, please wire me the money. Thank you kindly, CEO of the 600 million dollar networking company, Richard Birecki And I would hire Bo Outlaw to shoot my freethrows for me.

To: Saul Feinberg Jr. who wrote (7987)	4/1/1998 8:24:00 AM
From: Sector Investor	Respond to of 42804

<<The question we have to ask ourselves is this: If someone gives you $650 Million to compete with MRV, would you take the offer? If the answer is yes, then MRV is overvalued, if the answer is no, then obviously MRV is undervalued, since $650M is the current market cap. >> LU paid MORE than that just for Livingston to get into RAS. They paid 8-9 times sales. MRVC's Xyplex was categorized by Noam as more like Livingston. Xyplex's new RAS product that is in Beta is hinted by MRVC management as being stronger than BAY's new product. Xyplex had 7% of RAS in 1997. I don't think Livinston had more than that. Livingston's sales in 1997 were about 80 Million - not much higher than Xyplex's declining revs under Whittaker. Xyplex offers much more than just RAS, too. And MRVC paid only $35 million - less than 1 times sales.