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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (59600)	8/19/1998 3:06:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

<---OT----><---Total nonsense----> Paul: calculating pussies (?) hummm that is a new one for me,where do I get one ?<vbg> You said: 'Just a game that us calculating pussies engage in.' Sorry couldn't resist,pardon me.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (59600)	8/19/1998 3:12:00 PM
From: JPR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuzz: asymptotic, Chuzz, is it good or bad.<GGG> Moron in maths JPR

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (59600)	8/19/1998 4:01:00 PM
From: LWolf	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuzz... there was a fellow on CNBC this am that said he thought DELL's hyper growth rate was good for about 5 years. (this was repeated to me, I didn't actually hear the fellow). laura

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (59600)	8/19/1998 4:10:00 PM
From: JPR	Respond to of 176387

Chuzz: Growth will most likely be asymptotic, and Dell would never have 100% of the market. Why do you throw these curve balls at us? <GGG> JPR

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (59600)	8/20/1998 2:20:00 AM
From: AlanH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Greetings CTC, and thanks for the formula... Indeed, if current marketshare is given we should be able to approximate relative growth -- assuming a sustained predatory advantage. So, our challenge becomes proofing the marketshare figures. (The predatory argument belongs to those with vendor attachment.) The "market leader" moniker [mentioned previously] is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, given all the talk of DELL's #2/#1 position. [I understand that the PR is not marketshare based, although undertones are there.] In earnest, I question that DELL's presence in the relavent PC market is 8-10%. It is my belief that DELL has a much stronger market position -- beyond business mix -- when evaluating current computing requirements. We can debate semantics of "marketshare" as a historical measure, but the fundamental issue is future consumption. And, future consumption has been approximated at 15%. You may have read my analog of Lotus marketshare; that is, at some point Lotus had claim to ~70% of the DOS spreadsheet space. Conceptually, a similar paradigm shift may be at play with PC vendors. Herein is the conflict: we can assert that DELL has a commanding position in the market, but to do so implies that the market is/has shifted in such a way that 8-10% marketshare figure becomes meaningless -- by definition. So, we are left with the question of whether 15% growth represents: a)an overall PC requirement, or b)net-new requirement excluding "technology refresh." To-date, I have not found a satisfactory answer to this question. To summarize (since I ramble), we've been given 15% as a predicted PC consumption rate. IF this is related to overall requirements, then we can discount marketshare figures associated with now (presumably) inferior business models. That is, 15% = 15%. The mention of these things is not of contempt, rather to explore the figures as real or non-real. Curiously, Alan