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 : BAY Ntwks (under House) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockMan who wrote (5669)	5/5/1998 8:03:00 PM
From: George A. Roberts	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6980

Another stellar quarter for CISCO. All the press is favorable ie Street.com etc. Headlines like "Cisco looks even more like Godzilla". The only way Bay is going to make it is to be bought out. Cisco said it gained market share , probably in all segments...damm what a company ! I cant even look myself in the mirror when I think that it came down to Cisco or Bay for me in 96' and I choose Bay...As for the Fantasy of Intel / Bay...well its FORE not Bay ..that one is shot to hell..,.NEXT ????/ George

To: StockMan who wrote (5669)	5/5/1998 9:24:00 PM
From: Doug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6980

Stockman: You may well be correct. It would appear that the Senior Sales Staff have not been able to establish rapport with the Fortune 500 Departmental Heads . The Corporate Culture at these levels is quite different and Networking Protocols closely guarded. To be accepted one needs the product , the reliability , the service and in addition a perfect understanding of their culture. In return, they offer loyalty and partnership. Networking has always been a part of Business. Bay will do better only when it can Network with the Fortune 500 of the World.

To: StockMan who wrote (5669)	5/6/1998 7:05:00 AM
From: larry pollock	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6980

It is a remarkable contrast between Bay and Cisco. Bay/House still stuck in product transition problems like House's predecessor, combined with complaints about changes in customer purchasing patterns. Cisco, on the other hand, merely keeps executing its gameplan and gaining market share from Bay. Cisco does not seem to be having problems with customer purchasing patterns. I have been a shareholder since August 1995, and there does not seem to be much difference between Ludwick and House. Ludwick didn't know how to run the company and, for the time being, I'm not convinced that House knows how to run Bay either.