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 : 3Com Corporation (COMS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: joe who wrote (22522)	10/5/1998 8:59:00 PM
From: Eric	Respond to of 45548

Joe, Cisco still has a virtual strangle hold on the "Core" of the internet. Coms is at the edge and Eric B. has continued to state that. It would be foolish for 3Com to try and take on Cisco's turf. Eric B. pretty much stated this a few qtrs ago. I own both stocks with the majority in Cisco. Both of these companies will take the lions share of internet hardware for quite a while. Intel and the others can only WISH! Our and the world's economies will slow down but the internet won't! regards, Eric

To: joe who wrote (22522)	10/5/1998 11:20:00 PM
From: Steve Porter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 45548

Joe, I'm sure some of the Fortune 500 companies want to save $$, but what's most important to many of them is that they have reliability and the end-to-end hand holding service of an expert. They want to know who to blame when things go wrong. I'm wondering if COMS is set up to do this for the "big companies". It seems to me that COMS will make products simple, inexpensive, easy to upgrade, easy to maintain, but the customer service will still come from the resellers and the systems integration consultants. These resellers will prefer to push COMS products because they're cheaper, easier to upgrade, etc. BUT, are Fortune 500 companies ready to deal with resellers? How is COMS going to enter their area? They want a "CSCO company" hand-holding they're every move. I think COMS' strategy is to say, we don't need the F-500 sector that much. The SME sector is much bigger and they can sell much more volume. I think this is the "truly profitable" market is to be found. Re: Service issues. You have a bit of a point there, but I can get hand holding from COMS with a simple phone call to tech support. The same as with CSCO. True COMS won't send someone to the site, but they will recommend someone good in the area, which is better IMHO. The problem with having your own "field guys" is that you get into a situation where you are responsible for their actions. For example, if my IBM machine breaks and an IBM guy comes to fix it, but knows nothing, it looks bad on IBM. If IBM says "call these guys, they will help you" and they know nothing IBM only looks 50% as bad IMHO. I can call IBM back and say "okay, who now".. (this is more of a presonal thing though I think). INTC will not be able to compete with COMS in the network area. They just won't have the expertise and quality of products. COMS by far has the best distribution channels for network products. Anybody can make network products, but not many can make them better than COMS. INTC needs to stick to it's core business -- chips. That's why I'm not too worried by INTC or CPQ for that matter. No I'm not saying Intel can compete with COMS, I'm just saying they are the only company out there to "get" COMS. The only company out there in the industry that understands the business model, because the NIC, etc. business model is almost identical to the MPU business model (volume, cost control, retail channels and OEM deals). CSCO doesn't get this, and NT and LU sure as hell don't get it. That's why I said Intel would be teh best fit. I never said it was a likely fit ;-) Steve