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: StockMan who wrote (13987)	5/6/1998 4:14:00 PM
From: Barry Grossman	Respond to of 77400

Stockman, Here's a fact. exchange2000.com Barry

To: StockMan who wrote (13987)	5/6/1998 4:33:00 PM
From: Peppe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Stockman, Obviously all the points you made have not affected CSCOs earnings, market share gains, growth, gross margins, etc. When a company is a the top like CSCO, competitors look with magnifying glasses to find chinks in the armor. I don't deny your points, I just believe their importance is highly exaggerated. My .2 cents: 1-L3 switching: Yes CSCO is late to the game, but so what ? They haven't lost any significant router deals, because existing L3 switches don't have conventional router capabilites. If you need a router to do VLAN routing in IP only networks, then a L3 switch makes sense. Otherwise, CSCO wins... 2-CSCO has re-iterated their great relationship with MSFT at the CC. DEN is a MSFT/CSCO initiative, dependant on NT 5.0. We have yet to see the real benefits of this relationship. And NOVL is akin to BAY. The just don't matter anymore. 3- Granite deal was to deliver GE technology to CSCO. Again CSCO may be a little late, but obviously it's noy hurting them win new switching deals. FE- channel is a fine substitute for most customers. 4- LU and NT partnerships have not been announced, but I would venture that something this big takes time. (Certainly more than 3 months). This one's a real stretch on your part. 5- Alcatel screw-up ? I'm not sure what you mean. Did CSCO lose a significant piece of business because of this ? If not, who cares. 6- AT&T issue: I thought Chambers was awesome in taking blame for the outage and I'm sure AT&T appreciates that. It's not going to affect their business in the short term and any technical issues either have or will be resolved quickly. BTW, CSCO closed at a new all time high, $ 76, giving it a market cap of over $ 77 Billion. That's a lot of L3 switch companies ... Peppe

To: StockMan who wrote (13987)	5/6/1998 4:41:00 PM
From: Andrew Brockway	Respond to of 77400

Stickman, Thanks for providing such helpful insight - any information which isn't just hearsay is welcome. However, I think the manner in which you post makes it difficult for us to respect your thoughts. Cisco and its shareholders have done fairly well over the past few years and it appears that the above average performance will continue for awhile longer. If the "story" begins to change then we'll all have to determine if this company still suits our individual investment goals. Your posts, to date, have done little to convince me that it's time to re-evaluate my position. Seems like whenever you think about Cisco, your little tummy gets all twisted and crampy, and you just have to vent with an insipid post. Good luck with whatever your Bay/Cisco position is. Andrew

To: StockMan who wrote (13987)	5/6/1998 4:47:00 PM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 77400

"Forgot to add that Cisco sells "faulty" products (according to CNBC report on the ATT problem)" Just because systems go down, doesn't mean they are not quality products. Computers go down all the time, and then they are fixed. It's one of the hazards of the information age. Every other networking company has had problems of this nature as well. "This is evident in the inadequacy of testing (Cisco is proposing beta testing the vaporware 8510 for JUST 1 month) before releasing the product." If this is a product that Cisco acquired through the purchase of another company, how do you know that the product has not been beta tested exhaustively even before Cisco's beta testing? "Those poor Customers are really fooled by the STORY that this company spins. (Yeah like they really care about customers, with their HIGH router and catalyst switch prices)" So Cisco is batting 999 instead of 1000. No one is perfect. But people trust Cisco because if something goes wrong they take responsibility rather than deflect it. So much so that they chartered a jet to get new routers out to AT&T to fix the problem. What other company do you know that goes to those lengths to make sure the customers are satisfied. Your anti-Cisco tirade just isn't very convincing in light of other networking companies' performance.