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 : Aware, Inc. - Hot or cold IPO? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (4052)	8/13/1998 8:40:00 PM
From: margin_man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9236

<<<By these calculations (and I admit to a vast set of unsubstantiated assumptions) the most AWRE would capture would be $150 m over 3 years.>>> I think you will have this number changed by this December. P.

To: Bill who wrote (4052)	8/14/1998 1:51:00 AM
From: Scrapps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9236

Bill while you are making assumptions, I'd like to suggest a couple to add into your figuring. * Businesses. Their connections are, in most cases, within a short distance of the CO...thus they should be considered as a potential contributor to the royalty fees. * The other end of the connection...there are two ends to the connection. These may only double or triple your figures...but what the heck. <g>

To: Bill who wrote (4052)	8/14/1998 10:55:00 AM
From: Norman Klein	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9236

Thanks Bill, for your strong analysis. You paint a strong well-constructed worst-case scenario. It is a nice piece of analysis. I am continuing to stick with Aware for the immediate future, because I believe that there are still many factors (that haven't occurred yet) that could dramatically change the overall scenario. But you have presented a strong negative case. Hope that you were equally sharp with Ciena.

To: Bill who wrote (4052)	9/28/1998 11:39:00 AM
From: Johnathan C. Doe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9236

Bill, you must be a janitor; you don't have any of this analyzed properly at all. You are looking at this from a micro-cosmic level; not macro which is how non-tech types analyze things they don't grasp; using old fashion methods. What you don't understand is that bigger companies need this technology and don't have years of expertise accumulated. If a big company is left out; goodbye future. They are willing to pay premiums so that they can offer packages of capability. You don't factor any of that into your meaningless numbers.