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 : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jack Colton who wrote (9210)	6/25/1998 12:48:00 PM
From: Kent Rattey	Respond to of 42804

Jack, Funny you would mention "Johnny come lately". I just bought 1000 shares due to the fact that they are co-incidentally reporting earnings on the same day as ERICY, who has admitted being in talks with 3 networking companies. I wanted some anyway, and this was a good excuse! But if the earnings are good, and they announce a takeover on the same day as the earnings, they may not have to take the beating Nortel took. I guess I'm just smokin something again, but I still like the stock. Kent

To: Jack Colton who wrote (9210)	6/25/1998 8:15:00 PM
From: CF Rebel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42804

Jack, Thanks for your response to my query. As for reasons to consider acquiring/partnering with network builders/integrators, your thinking reflects my own. The only thing that makes me leery of such arrangements is what I know from reading of other companies in many industries in analogous situations. The problem has to do with both how the parent management treats the wisdom of the subsidiary management (as you mentioned about Nortel and the company you worked for) and purchasing requirements the parent may insist on. Some parent companies require subsidiaries to purchase only the parent's components even if products with a better price/same or better performance ratio can be had elsewhere by the subsidiary. This almost always leads to a pernicious degradation of the intent to give the customer the best solution for the money. In some cases, where a company is guaranteeing performance to a very high degree this might be understandable, but in most cases I think not. How MRVC management would handle these issues should they acquire integrators, is a concern to me. I wouldn't want them to require the subsidiary to use an MRV/NBase/Xyplex product if a product of better price/performance ratio were available from a competitor. This would certainly ensure that MRV would be kept on it's toes. In this, as you said, the network engineers would be invaluable in keeping the company apprised of MRV weaknesses. If MRV's philosophy was to respect the subsidiary management and not require purchase of the company's product, I'm very much for this idea. Any thoughts you have on this are welcome. CF Rebel