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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (29989)	7/28/1998 8:59:00 AM
From: Aitch	Respond to of 97611

rudedog, Spot on! I suppose it is the spin that is put on the news that is relevant. Some analysts (and investors) would do better in politics<g> H

To: rudedog who wrote (29989)	7/28/1998 9:40:00 AM
From: SecularBull	Respond to of 97611

So what did CPQ sell in Q1, when you take away those that you've shifted to Q2? Compaq's problems with the channel sound like incompetent, not to mention dishonest, management to me. LoD

To: rudedog who wrote (29989)	7/28/1998 10:29:00 AM
From: SecularBull	Respond to of 97611

TO ALL: This post is from rudedog on the DELL Thread. Please read, as I think it is very important. Thanks, LoD. To: +LONGonDELL (54510 ) From: +rudedog Tuesday, Jul 28 1998 9:54AM ET Reply # of 54674 LoD - According to a CPQ sales guy, Enrico Pesatori put out an internal memo to the sales force yesterday that basically said that NA sales had to 'pay the piper' for the channel stuffing in 97 - i.e. CPQ got credit for nearly 3M units in 3Q and 4Q 97 which did not sell out until 1Q and 2Q 98. This confirms lee's post earlier on real sales rates. No whining there - he was reinforcing the idea that the only way for CPQ to remain competitive was to keep inventory low and concentrate on sales out. He also made the point that 3Q sales measurements should more accurately reflect real sales, as long as inventory numbers remain constant at about 4 weeks, and that real sales to customers reflected CPQ's 13M / yr run rate (i.e. a little over 3M per quarter).

To: rudedog who wrote (29989)	7/28/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: SecularBull	Respond to of 97611

MORE RELEVANT INFO from rudedog, posted on the DELL Thread-> To: +LONGonDELL (54505 ) From: +rudedog Tuesday, Jul 28 1998 9:31AM ET Reply # of 54672 LoD - >>The inefficiency of the indirect marketers isn't something I'd like to see go away.<< Based on what I see happening at CPQ, Dell does not have anything to worry about. CPQ may do a better job of 'cloning' Dell than IBM or HP (I think they will) but they will never get close to the lightweight model Dell has developed. IMO CPQ will transition to a business model where PC sales are a sideline - they just need to do that in a way that does not open the door to their high end competition (IBM, HP and SUN). Dell will be the primary beneficiary of this strategy (along with CPQ themselves).