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 : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PaperChase who wrote (10270)	8/26/1998 5:33:00 PM
From: David Semoreson	Respond to of 42804

>>Don't be thick-headed. ... Good investors listen to both sides of the argument. << I have listened, even complimented some of Pinks picks and analysis method, and then reran the numbers based on a worst-case of the SEC threat. Trying to THINK instead of simply worshipping PINK. Message 5593639 I don't see you or Pink or any of his disciples discussing the details .... its all just a pile-on, but when the smoke clears this is an incredible bargain even if Pink is right. The shorts may make some money in the next 6 weeks, but you have no idea what is coming. ** David

To: PaperChase who wrote (10270)	8/26/1998 11:05:00 PM
From: Dee Jay	Respond to of 42804

there is plenty of precedent to be wary of companies which continually report wildly rising sales and profits - companies that shipped bricks (and later the investors s--t bricks!) and called them sales, and on and on and on. But MRVC does not show any of those characteristics and no one has made any sort of reasonable case on the specifics of MRVC. What you've heard is guilt by analogy - XXX Co. did this and MRVC possibly does it too - or claims that salesmen are leaving in droves which prove to be unfounded. No one has pointed to any real smoke and mirrors, only unsubstantiated claims that smoke and mirrors lurk in the accounting. Another person analyzed the charges and made a convincing case that they were well founded. Management cannot refute ephemeral claims and will not take the time to even try. Management continues to do what it does best - growing the company and puingt out good quality products, many of which repesent leading edge technology. Management addresses issues (inventory increases, DSO) and corrects the perceived problems even when they're only temporary glitches. Some investors take the position that the management is guilty until proven innocent, that everything said in CCs or elsewhere is suspect. Where these investors are coming from remains to be seen but I find some whose motives are more suspect than that of the management. Where management has failed shareholders is in refusing to do a better job of telling the company's story to Wall St. and elsewhere - even a few roadshows haven't done all that much to bolster interest in the company. Noam et al believe, I think, that the company's progress alone is required to provide shareholder value and that anything more is unprincipled hype. I wish they did not have that view and perhaps hiring a PR firm represents a turn in a more positive direction. I am a long term investor and believe in the long term prospects of MRV; it hasn't stopped me from trading to take advantage of fluctuations but until something definitive is shown by P(*)k and others I'm going to hold the view that the company's fundamentals speak for themselves. Too many outrageous slanders have been uttered on this thread, unsubstantiated claims of crookedness, cooking of books, shady accounting practices, etc. For all of those claims and innuendoes and suggestings and hints and rumors and comparisons with other companies' practices, nothing whatever has shown up. Where's the DNA on a blue dress, Pink? Dee Jay