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: GRANOLA who wrote (60122)	8/21/1998 1:51:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Granola, the reason the model can't work for Compaq is straight forward -- Compaq is unwilling to jettison resale channels. This decouples demand for computers from the manufacturer. Inventories will remain higher, and channel inventories will always be a problem. Fear of losing a lot of sales over the short term prevents Compaq from emulating Dell. LOD once likened this situation to riding a tiger. I think that description is apt. Remember, the point behind JIT is to minimize inventories, and given the rapid rate of evolution of product, this means creating as close a relationship to the purchase of components to the purchase of finished goods as possible. The existence of resellers is antithetical to this concept. Thus, it is necessary to have an integrated BTO, direct sales, JIT business model. Just part of the system won't work. TTFN, CTC

To: GRANOLA who wrote (60122)	8/21/1998 1:55:00 PM
From: LWolf	Respond to of 176387

Granola... this is not just about having a stronger supplier relationship.... it's about the systems infrastructure it takes to support the whole integration process, and TOP management that is visionary and flexible. To quote Chuzz: a paradigm that could not be copied piecemeal. It is a highly integrated sales/assembly/purchasing system with a tremendous financial overlay. As much as people would like to believe that the new languages and platforms make software engineering easier (and it is somewhat easier today), there is still labor intensive efforts for the analysis and design of those systems which support the business model. To catch up, another company has to understand the model, understand the data required, establish all the processing rules, let alone the business relationships it takes to manage all the information. This is truly an awesome undertaking to integrate all these areas, for any company to try to compete with DELL on DELL's level. Laura

To: GRANOLA who wrote (60122)	8/21/1998 2:06:00 PM
From: Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Granola,..Re:<< please explain why compaq cannot copy this..>> It has been explained on this thread. Please see Message 5531570 I'm sure if you want details that somebody would be happy to accommodate. Bottom line is that it's not as easy as everyone seems to think. Lee

To: GRANOLA who wrote (60122)	8/21/1998 2:29:00 PM
From: Venkie	Respond to of 176387

I went short Cien at 33...I would like to cover at 31...I lost a pt when I tried to trade it on the up so I went short...I haven't shorted much

To: GRANOLA who wrote (60122)	8/21/1998 2:55:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Respond to of 176387

Granola, I just wanted to add another point concerning Dell's arrogance. A vendor who is sensitive to the needs of his customer as makes his business conform to their requirements flourishes. That is the essence of Dell's success with BTO. Dell does not decide on the configuration in advance, as do Dell's competitors. Dell has evolved a system that lets the customer decide. So if you think about it in this way, you can see that vendors who do not attempt to meet their customers' needs (in this case Dell is the customer) are being arrogant. I think the bottom line is that suppliers who find Dell's attitude arrogant are in need of some attitude readjustment. TTFN, CTC