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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (1563)	5/18/1998 3:15:00 PM
From: Shege Dambanza	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

Their "public" revenue recognition policy is described (sparingly) in their Mar 17, 1998 10-K filing with the SEC (available at edgar.sec.gov). The entire policy is reproduced below: REVENUE RECOGNITION The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with Statement of Position No. 91-1, Software Revenue Recognition. Software license revenue is recognized when all of the following criteria have been met: there is an executed license agreement, software has been shipped to the customer, no significant vendor obligations remain, the license fee is fixed and payable within twelve months and collection is deemed probable. Maintenance, consulting and other revenues consist primarily of maintenance and are recognized ratably over the term of the maintenance contract, typically 12 to 36 months.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (1563)	5/18/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: Melissa McAuliffe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6974

It's possible everyone is jumping to some conclusions here. I went back and reviewed the last two 10-Q's filed in August and November of 1997. Unless I missed something, it doesn't appear to have been sebl's practice to detail their revenue recognition policy except in the 10-K. It even refers the reader to the 10-K for detailed information regarding accounting policies. So instead of saying it is conspicuously absent in this 10-Q maybe one should review the prior 10-Q's first. Shege--How much more do you want them to say with respect to their policies? It seems to me they've pretty much covered the bases and appear to be in compliance. Unless you think there is something more they should have mentioned?? If so, could you let us know. Also, one note here---due to the fact that sebl has fewer but larger deals, I can guarantee that the auditors reviewed these contracts in extensive detail before signing off on the audit. If there were hundreds upon hundreds of smaller deals that wouldn't necessarily be the case. But there's just too much at stake not to and they are also subject to the same class action suits as sebl should dubious revenue recognition policies be discovered.