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 : Osicom(FIBR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CMS27 who wrote (7264)	6/11/1998 1:10:00 PM
From: Brian	Respond to of 10479

I received my 10-KSB today. I thought it was interesting that, for all of those posts from this SI board stating that they would vote against Par Chadha as a director on the December 12, 1997 annual meeting, only 308,805 actually voted against him and 16,119,561 voted for him. On the other hand the 1997 Directors Plan just made it with 5,840,207 votes for and 3,018,039 votes against. Look's to me like a resounding vote of approval for Par from the shareholders. But not for the stock option plans!

To: CMS27 who wrote (7264)	6/11/1998 1:40:00 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10479

<< I'm long and will remain long unless their business plan completely fails >> It already has. << And the other players not only are still designing metro DWDM, but they don't have the technological addons that Osicom has. >> If companies like LU and CIEN are behind Osicom technically, then how come they are partnering with other industry giants such as C$CO and Osicom is not? They are forming things like the Optical Internetworking Forum, etc. LU is teaming with NN to form standards. What is Osicom doing? How come they aren't participating? << Ask Cienna if they can add the sort of features to thier DWDM that Osicom has just announced, electrical networking interfaces, that put the old copper network onto the fiber ring. >> Ciena is spelled with ONE n. You claim to know that Ciena's technology is inferior yet you can't even spell their name right. There is no point in me trying to argue with you or anyone else on this thread about the technology because none of us work with WDM in the real world. The easiest way is to look at the sales. Osicom introduced their WDM products over a year ago yet they have only marginal sales to show for it. Obviously the market is NOT buying their products. Either they are inferior, they aren't needed, or they aren't priced right. Ahh, but you say it's all about the technology. If the technology was clearly superior the market would reflect that. Have you noticed that many high-tech companies with little revenues and no earnings in sight have billion dollar market caps? That's because they are believable. The market has already arrived at the conclusion that Osicom is NOT believable, otherwise it would be priced accordingly. There is a saying, "you get what you pay for". If you scrape the bottom of the barrel with these penny stock hype schemes your chances of success are slight. If you pay up for companies like YHOO or C$CO when they are young it may seem expensive at the time, but there was a good reason the stocks were so expensive. Is that so hard for you thick-skulled amateur FIBR investors to understand?