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 : Concurrent Computer (CCUR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jeffbas who wrote (3866)	5/28/1998 2:10:00 PM
From: Goodboy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21143

I am happy to say that I have taken advantage this week of the stupidity that has allowed CCUR to fall below $4. I would now like to share a fact that has maybe been overlooked. I am also sick of clicking through the Tang messages because they are factless, pointless, useless and worthless. I hate clutter. I like facts. Here they are for your consideration. I believe we all remember the panic and speculation after the SFA/SEAC IVOD announcement. I think we remember that a few good posts enlightened everyone that SEAC was just one of the vendors SFA was going to work with and that they were a very good "posterboy" for SFA IVOD rollout at Cable 98 (as well as their digital server integration experience). The facts are this. SEAC is a money losing company. Unlike CCUR, they have several analysts covering them. Like CCUR, SEAC needs IVOD for future profitablity and growth (analysts have written this in their reports). That means SEAC is desperate to get business to attempt to become profitable. Our friends at CCUR don't have this dillema and may actually have some growth prospects in their software business. So the question is "why didn't SFA ask for or demand equity or warrents from SEAC". Those of us who have seen and spoke to industry players or attended shows know CCUR has a better product on both price and performance. We know CCUR is not desperate for cash and may have excess cash by June 30th. We know SEAC is losing big money and IVOD is their lifeline. So why didn't SFA demand or ask for equity? The answer is that SEAC has the tech prowess and integration experience for servers, but CCUR has the superior product that is going to sell and profit more. CCUR will see revenue and big orders inside 1998. That is not a guess. It is a fact. Read for yourself. April 21, 1998 Scientific-Atlanta Announces Agreement with SeaChange for Complete Digital Video-On-Demand Service for Cable Systems in 1998 Atlanta, GA -- Scientific Atlanta announced today an agreement with SeaChange International to develop a complete, server-to-set-top digital video-on-demand system (VOD) for cable networks. This agreement makes Scientific Atlanta the first company to offer cable operators all network components for an integrated, commercially feasible digital VOD service in 1998. Let's compare that SFA release to the one below. May 20, 1998 Scientific_Atlanta Expands Cable's Video-On-Demand Options with Concurrent's Server Solution Atlanta, GA -- Scientific-Atlanta announced today a non-binding letter of intent with Concurrent Computer Corporation to collaborate in developing and deploying a commercially-viable, integrated, digital video-on-demand system for cable operators in 1998. Working with multiple video-on-demand server vendors, Scientific-Atlanta plans to support a range of video-on-demand solutions to meet specific cable operator requirements. Contrast and compare the two. Seachange is the "first" and has an "agreement" and will "offer" it's system for cable "networks". Sounds like they agreed to work together on integration (no contract or formal agreement). They released before Cable 98 with a well known digital server supplier, thus first to offer a full integrated solution (posterboy status, first to offer). Seachange sells systems to Cable Networks as well as Cable operators (MSO's) Concurrent has a non-binding letter of intent (which will be binding shortly with full details of the arrangement). They are collaberating in developing and deploying a system in 1998. Deploying a system means they are going to install this system for cable operators in 1998. Very different from SEAC release. SFA has piece of CCUR and incentive to bring them business in addition to the fact that they have a superior offering. The use of the word deploy is the same word used in another press release with another company that CCUR shareholders should be interested in. SFA said in their release that Time Warner will be deploying it's Explorer 2000 and digital services this year. This is Mosaic theory. It works well. I am doing my best to point in the right direction. I can say this as fact. CCUR shipped a test server to Time Warner in October of 1997. Pegasus project will be launched starting in August and IVOD by year end. That means server orders will happen very soon. The picture is getting clearer. The info is proving deadly accurate. The stock will be in the 8 to 10 range this year. Investor road show will start this summer after some significant events. Buckle up, the stupid money has given you another chance. Just pointing out the obvious here for those that don't get it yet No hype here. The proof will find it's way to the Dow Jones wire and CCUR stock price. Good luck.