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 : OBJECT DESIGN Inc.: Bargain of the year!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	6/28/1998 7:32:00 PM
From: hasbeen101	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3194

I guess you don't believe the Tucker Anthony estimate for revenue of $15M and earnings of 2 cents a share ($600k). Would you like to specify your predictions for Q2? We'll know the result in 2 or 3 weeks.

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	6/28/1998 7:37:00 PM
From: hasbeen101	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3194

The word on the Street about ODIS is that they'll have flat revenues indefinitely into the future This is certainly consistent with recent trading. However, a couple of years ago I tried looking back as far as I could on a Bloomberg terminal to see what sort of trailing P/E ratio Microsoft traded at. I was surprised that the P/E ratio was so low back in the early nineties (about 20-30 as I recall). I don't think Wall Street is too great at predicting future technology trends. All I can see "at ground level" is that more organisations than ever are seriously interested in deploying ODBMS applications.

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	6/29/1998 5:19:00 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3194

Ahhaha's lurking in the twilight zone again... Just 2 weeks before the quarterly results will be released. But let me first refresh our memories... On March 23, 1998, I posted the following message #1804: AHHAHA! (burst of laughter... not your nickname!) I really enjoy reading you... Tell you what... I think reading your posts is like reading the groove version of a Dilbert joke. In all seriousness, I think this '98Q1 will be just another surprise quarter: $13+ million in revenues with $300k net income (ie 1 cent/share). While I understand Damien's 10-years timeframe for assessing ODIS' long-term prospects, I think that a 25% growth rate should be achievable today because we can't assume ODIS' quarterly revenues to remain flat for the next 9 years and then to suddenly jump by 100%!! If this is a Success Story, this story starts NOW. And ahhaha, with his usual boldness, replied in the below message #1810: Hope so, but all the evidence points to the other direction And we all know what was ODIS' 98Q1 results... Hence, I will not elaborate on them... So, ahhaha, do we have to assume that your current estimations for ODIS' 98Q2 --ie your so-called word on the (dumb) Street-- refer to the same ''evidence'' that brought you to mislead everybody a quarter back? If yes, I suggest that from now on you put the following header on your messages: ''Warning: the following is a contrary indicator!!'' It's really frustrating to see a bunch of idiotic large shareholders dumping this gem... The million of shares that changed hands last week were all dumped at a loss!! Since they've likely been purchased @ $5.00-$7.00+ a share and sold @ a rock-bottom $5.00! I know, I know: those golden boys can afford to throw away their other-people-money just to fool us around... Anyway, I strongly suggest the audience to stick to the fundamentals and to think of ODIS as of an ''S-shaped curve'' story. Hold on! Regards, Gustave.

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	6/29/1998 6:03:00 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 3194

Oh, btw, regarding ODIS Sales VP, Kirk Bowman (33), he's the only insider who's been reported as having bought 40,000 shares at an average $5.5 in January 1998 and this was not a ''hit-and-go'' speculation on the 98Q1 results since he was not reported as having sold any single share since then. Now, the following comments are pretty close to plain defamation: Remember Bowman? The guy that is so clever? He isn't so clever now, but he'll get clever when he gets a chance coming soon to jump from this operation. You can't be great and be associated with a loser. You have to save face by slinking away. Then in the future when Bowman reappears, people will say he was so great. You guys still singing the praises to Bowman? I don't think so. Hope you'll be able to elaborate on that in 2 weeks as the results are out... Otherwise I'll send a message to our beloved SI webmistress. I admit that I have also dumped a few companies on SI but it was justified! Fulcrum Technologies for instance: this Canadian softwarehouse dropped from $15.00 to $1.00 a few weeks after I warned people on SI and it was later acquired by PC-DOCS for a few more pennies... VSNT's another good one: I've never been up with that one! But then again, look at its latest price trend... Yet I've never trashed the management involved in these companies --unless on a humoristic tone. Gustave.

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	6/29/1998 11:37:00 AM
From: Mark Finger	Respond to of 3194

>>ORCL is in big trouble too. Earnings are slowing even faster than >>analyst's projected. Not only earnings but revenues too. I do not know where this is coming from. Oracle beat the last quarters concensus by $.03. Generally they have been beating numbers (except for one quarter of a miss by about $.03). Part of Oracle's problem is the slowing of the growth rate. Last quarter they ONLY grew Y/Y by about 24% on sales. The item of concern over the last year has been the low growth rate on DBMS licenses (several quarters in the single digit percents). This has been the primary point of concern for Oracle. However, there may be a partial explanation for that for Oracle's last two quarters. Beginning January 1 (if I understand this correctly), companies could not count products as sales when they shipped to distributers or VAR's. Rather, they could only count them when they actually shipped to the end user. Since this went into effect January 1 (if I read correctly), that means that a portion of what they formerly counted as sales will be delayed for a period of time (probably 3-9 months on the average). Another item I read about this change is that companies were not allowed to restate prior years changes if this were the only change. That means that any comparison of 1998 sales to 1997 sales would understate the growth rate because it would be an "apples to oranges" comparison (one had those numbers in it and the other would not). Since a significant portion of Oracle DBMS sales move through these sales (10-30% of licenses), and some of these sit on the shelf for more than a quarter, there could be significant effects. This could account for a portion of Sybase's problems in Q1 also. (but not any IFMX problems, because they did go back and restate back several years using the new rules, but they could because of the question of fraud). It will be interesting to see if the DBMS companies start showing better growth through remaining quarters of 1998 and into 1999; if so, part of the explanation could be the short-term effects of this accounting rules change. Mark

To: ahhaha who wrote (2065)	7/16/1998 6:51:00 PM
From: Mark K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3194

I just thought I'd put this post back up. Some people know ODIS, some people don't. by the way, ahhaha, you might want to start talking to some other parts of `the street'. -Mark K. To: Damien Laker (2064 ) From: ahhaha Saturday, Jun 27 1998 10:13PM ET Reply # of 2129 The word on the Street about ODIS is that they'll have flat revenues indefinitely into the future. That's why one institution dumped 600k block on the market and got 4 5/8. It will be a struggle for them to show a profit because all their wheeling and dealing including the sales effort by Bowman is failing. It isn't operational. ODIS front ended revenues and now they have to pay. The 2Q on the whisper circuit is dreadful, so the inside institutions have been getting out as much as the thin support will allow. Gustave was making some comments about "the bottom" being put in place. Well, that might be true once it stops making new lows. I keep thinking about whomever got the 4. On reflection especially in light of all the deals they've cut, you gotta start getting envious of the 4.