SI
SI
discoversearch

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: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (17845)10/6/1998 7:30:00 PM
From: DiB  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 77400
 
>> You're better off in a CD until a clearer picture is formed
You must be kidding, right? CD will give you 5 percent a year. Do you think CISCO will be lower than $50 this time next year? The last time I checked packets will still be flowing up and down those networks.
Somebody has to move those bits, and CISCO has arguably the most recognizable face in this market. IMO, after year 2000 is gone IT infrastructure will be booming like crazy... Long-term CISCO should do just fine, thank you.

Personally, I am not greedy. 30+ percent annually over 5 years works just fine for me. Better than any mutual fund or CD for that matter.



To: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (17845)10/6/1998 7:34:00 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 77400
 
any money in these stocks right now will be flushed away in the toilet. You're better off in a CD until a clearer picture is formed.
Hey, Puff, I am still up 25% overall for the year. I, like many on this board, am riding it through.



To: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (17845)10/6/1998 8:11:00 PM
From: alex pierson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 77400
 
Guess it's difficult to believe CSCO could be at $30 this time next year, but considering the economic conditions which could prevail then and the fact that at least two big competitors, Lucent and Nortel, will be trying to eat Cisco's lunch by then, does it seem possible that it could be there or lower? Is there a way out of it for Cisco? How will they be able to keep up the performance?

Alex P.