To: Nanda who wrote (11684 ) 5/21/1998 12:59:00 PM From: Ron Sirch Respond to of 13949
All: Some Info and Thoughts from the SEEC Board Post #2 re Wainwright/Arnold BUY Report << Development Initiatives: Post-2000 Market Focus" >> << SEEC has accelerated its non-Y2k product development initiative in order to apply its core technology to new applications such as Euro-conversions, Data Warehousing, Re-engineering, Web Enablement and Language Conversions. The company anticipates that the Year 2000 market will give way to increasing demand for such re-engineering technology, as clients demand greater access to legacy data and applications in open computing environments. The company expects to replace Year 2000 revenues, as we move through 2000, with revenue from the aforementioned target markets. As the Year 2000 market allows SEEC to broadly distribute its core technology to a mix of end-users and service providers, the company continues to build out its sales and marketing organization and enhance its technology base in order to meet growing demand for its technology.>> Sirch Comments: I am one of those optimists who believe that SEEC (and the other top Y2k companies) have a ton of non-Y2k work ahead of them. As CEO Ravi Koka says, a back log is already evident. Probably building as we speak. The markets will be there to tap, IMHO. But an analyst could take the other side of the coin and argue that it won't be that easy. Hey, I'll listen to anyone credible. HOWEVER, a number of analysts with access to large readerships, but very little solid research effort behind them, say there will be NO work for these companies after 2000. NO work?? Give me a break. It's nonsense to make statements like that. (I've heard the same on CNBC. Talk about large audiences!) In addition, my friends, these "analysts" have gone unchallenged by the factual counter-arguments that are so obvious. Not in vogue I guess. One of the "analysts" I'm talking about wrote some of this no-work-at-all drivel right off the home page of SI. How many of you with significant research time behind you challenged the silly assumptions he put forth? I did, but I think I was pretty much a lone voice and the writer just ducked and moved on. Alas, if we're on the right side of the issue, everything will come out just fine in the long run. Ron Sirch