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 : i2 Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: xfiles who wrote (815)	10/23/1998 1:14:00 PM
From: Melissa McAuliffe	Respond to of 2339

I still haven't listened to this cc...haven't had time yet. But I really think that itwo is very conservative. It seems they look around at other companies in the industry and are smart enough to think..."that might happen to us" regardless of how positive they see things internally. The difference between SAP/PSFT and ITWO is that ITWO is in the SCM arena which is hot and growing. Though SAP and PSFT have or will have SCM, they have a lot of other stuff too. The ERP market including the Financials, HR, etc. software seem to be experiencing the slower growth. So even if both SAP and PSFT grow SCM, we aren't just talking about SCM revenues. They have to grow SCM revenues just to make up for the decline in the other. I post frequently on the sebl thread that it's not right to compare SEBL to SAP and PSFT and I think the same thing about ITWO. If I'm correct, there aren't the legacy SCM systems out there being replaced. Isn't this a somewhat new market?? It is so much better that itwo is conservative. It's much less likely we'll be getting a big negative surprise down the road. It's a lot better this way...IMHO....

To: xfiles who wrote (815)	10/23/1998 1:15:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Respond to of 2339

While at it the Pru dude should have asked for a projection for 2000. All good points but he failed to get the fact that they didn't want to give them any firm guidance for 99,at least not yet but he kept insisting and I thought that was rather sophomoric on the guy's part. Considering the macro economic conditions of the world economies at the moment a projection in to 1999, seems rather futile at best,not only for i2 but for anybody unless they have the business on hand for 1999. Anyway that is how I see it,may not be worth much but nonetheless.

To: xfiles who wrote (815)	10/23/1998 1:38:00 PM
From: D. K. G.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2339

<<i2 said that SAP has so far shown mostly rhetoric. But i2 also said they would not draw inferences about the future from that; and they also said that this provides an excuse to managers who are looking for a rationale for delaying decisions. SAP is indeed getting some customers to pause to see what develops.>> It was also said that business managers who have a compelling need are not waiting for SAP/ERP solutions but adopting what works now. If a a manager has the luxury of waiting a year or two to implement a SCM solution i2 may be at a disadvantage. What % of business would prefer or can wait that long? A question to ponder. A negative impact by ERP vendors on i2's Q3 sales cycle was not seen. That can change of course. i2 was not comfortable with a revenue model pipeline of above 510 million. A figure apparently given at Planet 98. The ten % operating margin was mentioned but was also mentioned as undefined pending more analysis in a months time. i2's growth looks to be constrained from an internal "lack of feet on the street" than an external macro effect currently seen in many ERP companies. They will have to chose prospects carefully to ensure a high % of sales relative to prospects. Should i2 be lumped in with the ERP group and the same set of assumptions be applied to it? It is easy to do, it was the first thing I did when investigating this company 2 month ago. I enjoyed your previous cautionary counterpoints, it make us all better investors. Regards, Denis