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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Shroder Wertheim (Hijacked) who wrote (17647)	10/3/1998 10:41:00 AM
From: Ibexx	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77397

You are entitled to your own opinions. Whatever your thesis is, I got them all--MSFT, DELL, CSCO, LU, etc. Ibexx PS: I pray every night that neither CSCO nor LU will touch COMS. I am gussing you work (directly or indirectly) for COMS?

To: Shroder Wertheim (Hijacked) who wrote (17647)	10/3/1998 11:41:00 AM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77397

Shroder, I appreciate a researched perspective, however some of you data is either old or slightly incorrect. Cisco is in a market where standard protocol makes 90% of Cisco's gears replaceable today. Fundamentally this is a true statement, however the same can be said for Intc and Msft. You can place any OS on a PC - there's no fundamental "hooks" msft has that elminates this possibility - the DOJ would drool if that were the case. Intc, same. Cisco indeed does adhere to standars (funny that you brought up StrataCom's non-standard implementation, but I'll get to that in a moment). However Cisco's products go beyond standards and offer incremental functionality not available in many other platforms. Furthermore Cisco is way ahead of the convergence game, is pratically owning the churn in cable infrastrcutures, has taken the lead in DSL deployment, and continues to sign new business and new carriers throughout the year. 48c, 45c the last two quarters You've got this backwards... They did .45 in Q3, and .48 in Q4...and .34 in Q2. Earning are accelerating. Not decelerating. They are lower than FY 97, however this is waaaaaaay dialed in and Cisco, over the past three quarters has accelerated their growth, grown market share, and established themselves in new markets. StrataCom acquisition is not a smooth transition and its product by default running proprietary protocol that does not work with anybody else. I'm not sure why you say the StrataCOm acq. was not smooth, perhaps you can provide more detail. As for StrataCom's "proprietary" protocol I could dive into that one all day long, however StratCom's Products are fully standard. You're living in the past on this one. Perhaps you should visit the Cisco web page. As for how well they're doing. ATM switching is certianly a smaller percentage of Cisco's business than it is for ASND (you honorable mentions are just that), but if you look at revenue generation I think you'll find that Cisco's ATM switches pull in as much reveneue as all of ASND. I have no doubt that LU will do well in this space to, but to mention CS, Extreme, and 3COM in the same breath as LU, ASND, and CSCO is ... well....a joke. I know at least 10 Forture 500 companies switched from Cisco Cat 5500 to one of the above company in the last 3 months. Really? You sound very plugged in. Care to share who they are? did they switch (rip out the 5500 and replace them) or add a new switch that wasn't Cisco? I seriously doubt this statement. Provide some facts. I won't comment on your last paragraph. OG (biting his lip)

To: Shroder Wertheim (Hijacked) who wrote (17647)	10/4/1998 12:21:00 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 77397

3/97 vs. 9/98: P/E: 23 vs 47 P/S: 4.1 vs 10.1 P/CF: 19 vs 40 price decline from high: 34 to 21= 38% vs. 70 to 55= 21% 1.17= trailing 12M earnings 30%= long-term EPS growth rate 1.17 X 30= 35 So: if CSCO is given the same valuation it had at the bottom of its last downturn, it would fall to the 25-30 range. Fair valuation given EPS growth expectations is 35. Any other evaluation is wishful thinking and blind love, not logic. In 1997, there was sector risk, but no market or company risk. Today, there is lots of market risk, some sector risk, and still no company risk. That makes it hard to compare 3/97 and today. Still, I think it is fair to say that, overall, today's risks are greater than in 3/97. I thought about selling in the mid 60s, and posted my ruminations. Didn't sell. Don't know what I'm going to do now. The only thing I can say for sure, is that if CSCO goes to 35, I'll own a lot more shares of it than I do today.