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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peppe who wrote (15112)	7/16/1998 5:01:00 PM
From: Thomas Scharf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Peppe: >>From one Canuck to another <g> << Check my profile. I'm not a Canuck, just a free thinking investor living in Silicon Valley who knows an opportunity when he sees one. (so far I have a 10-bagger in CSCO all because I was impressed when I interviewed for a job with them. Didn't get the job but still got pretty rich) >> Don't buy NN's dominance.<< I didn't say they dominated, only that they had a "major" share. That means a big chunk which they do have...I think 25-30%. >>? How do you explain ASND's success given their lack of enterprise clients ?<< Recent appreciation of ASND has everything to do with take-over rumors and nothing to do with market performance. >>their sales are decreasing and the competition is getting tougher.<< The sales decrease is do to the drop in TDM sales (the product that ATM will replace). NN is caught in a product transition period. The ATM market is about to explode which bodes well for all players. Even with reduced market share there should be considerable growth for NN. >>there are plenty of losers. BAY,CS,COMS to name a few.<< At least the first 2 of these owe their failures to the inability to properly handle acquisitions. NN also had problems with UB, but took immediate action to stanch the flow of blood. Terry Mathews' strategy of creating small companies as technology partners and hooking up with big companies (Siemens/3Com) as marketing partners has many good points. Only a few companies like CSCO have made a go of the PacMan model of corporate growth. My favorite bad example is Gould Inc. which finally went bankrupt through misguided attempts to become a technology giant through acquisitions. As for competition, as I said, in a market growing this fast there can be more than 1 winner. The trick is to pick out and avoid the losers. Hind sight is always 20/20. I own CSCO because it is the 800lb gorilla in the LAN space and is a decent competitor in the WAN. I own NN as a pure play on the growth of the WAN backbone. btw: my long term position in NN has doubled in 3 years. Not spectacular in today's market, but decent. I've also made some money trading NN during the big run-up last year. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program consisting of childish bickering between Stockman and the rest of the CSCO thread. Regards, Thomas

To: Peppe who wrote (15112)	7/16/1998 10:12:00 PM
From: devans	Respond to of 77400

>> believe that they get passed over because they lack a significant >> presence in the enterprise network market and because they are >> based in Canada. >Ever hear of Nortel ? Canadian based, little enterprise base, >$30 billion market cap. I buy the Canadian comment. Compare LU to NT--which company is perceived in the better light? From Yahoo: LU's forward P/E is 56 based on Dec'98 earnings estimates, NT's is 30. Yet LU's projected earnings growth ('99) is 20.6%, NT's is 22.3. Numbers from the 'Detailed Research' Section on Yahoo.