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 : Ascend Communications (ASND) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Phoenix who wrote (57814)	12/4/1998 5:43:00 AM
From: Pigboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 61433

Gary, << DSLAM's are not DSL modems. The largest provider of DSL services by leaps and bounds is USWest - a Cisco DSL shop. This data will become apparent come end of year... I'm now understanding that you're looking at old data.... >> Could you explain further here Gary? DSLAMS, as far as I know are basically modem (ATU-Cs) racks so the connection can be completed at the CO's. The access multiplexor (the 'AM') is essentially a rack for the modems (with the essential software, interoperability to ie.5ESS gear), no? You say the largest provider of DSL by leaps and bounds is USWEST...possibly right now, but lets gets some perspective before we think CSCO owns DSL. The whole DSL field is in the 'red hot' growth stage now, imho, and will be for the next couple years. This info means (ie; CSCO biggest provider now) means very little really, especially with the tiny amount of lines currently in service just months ago. As far as I know, Alcatel has Pacbell and Cisco has USWest and part of PacBell territory (i believe inv. in COVAD), but people like Ascend are doing things busily (i hear) behind the covers in this field. CSCO is too, I am sure. I think Ascend is at some advantage here...It doesn't hurt to have a hole slew of ATM WAN access gear to go infiltrate accounts with. ;-)) I believe CSCO has USWEST for their ATM backbone, but who does ASCEND have?? They have some pretty attractive company is what. ADSL is a battle and CSCO does not own it because its too early...its just beginning and DSLAMS will be where the money is made. at least, thats some of what i have learned pigboy

To: The Phoenix who wrote (57814)	12/4/1998 8:35:00 AM
From: Mr.Fun	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 61433

Gary, We spend over $100K for detailed analyst reports, including extensive access to the analysts that do the research. I can not and will not provide you with URL's to look up this data. Yes, the numbers from the different analysts differ, but not by all that much and the differences are both predictable and attributable to specific biases in the way the data is collected and organized. We do not use them as "a single data point", thats why we buy so many sources - and do regular and extensive interviews ourself with Cisco, its competitors, customers and suppliers - but thank you for the lecture. Frankly, I think failing to consider a company objectively is more likely to result in "erred thinking". Some of the biggest canards about Cisco's business have been told to me by Cisco employees. I check these things out myself. Larry Carter has looked at my numbers and did not protest nor suggest that I didn't understand data collection 101. As for ATM switching over $1B in FY1998 - more than 12% of total? I'm sorry, but unless Cisco is purposely misleading every data source in the industry by the tune of more than $250million (and there is no reason to suspect Cisco would do so in a product category it wants to showcase). Gary - $1B is about equal to all of the sales of Ascend in the same time period (including remote access, etc.) and more than all the sales of NN. If Cisco's sales were in fact that high, it would have more than double the market share of each of these competitors -NO CREDIBLE DATA SOURCE IS SAYING THIS. In addition, where are the customers? AT&T's legacy frame relay network has provided strong revenues, but where are the other revenue sales that would support a $1B sales number, double the market share of the closest competitors. You've resorted to name calling. "I can't possibly have any idea as to what was campus based" Excuse me, but have you called the top 50 service providers worldwide and a healthy sprinkling of CLECs to check where Cisco, (and others) is in active deployment? There is something called basic research and it is my full time 70hr a week job. Thanks also for the lecture about DSLAMs not being the same thing as client modems. Gee, I'm glad you cleared this up for me. Do you think Cisco sold a billion dollars of DSLAMs too? The actual number for FY98 was less than $100million - USWest's roll out has not been as rapid as you seem to think (why don't you call them and talk about it?) and Cisco hasn't billed them for all of it yet anyway. Cable headends: Again, just how much revenue do you think Cisco billed in FY1998 ending in July? I agree that this will be good business in FY99, but I dare say, these anonymous deals you refer to (and I believe you) are unlikely to have been paid for 6 months ago. As for RAC. The Dell'oro group has been trying to establish and report a separate category for 3600 and 2600 like products. Guess who has been screaming bloody murder. While they are exciting products and Cisco is going great guns, you must admit that the 3600 does not compete directly with either the MAX or the TNT. I believe that the relevant measure for comparisons of market share should be 5200s, 5300s and 5800s. The point is that in this comparison, Cisco is clearly not even #2. Why is it so painful to concede this minor point. I have great faith in the ability of Cisco's management to navigate the carrier market and emerge in a real leadership role, but it does not mean that they are perfect. Just because someone else at Cisco told you a factoid doesn't make it true. I don't want to harp on it any more. I support Cisco long-term although I think the near-term revenue expectations of the street are too high. I realize you (like John Chambers) recognize how strong Ascend has performed in the competitive marketplace. I urge you not to react so strongly to any perceived criticism of Cisco. Your managment can take it and so can you. It will make the Cisco thread better as well. Right now it is a forum for shameless boosterism and self-congratulations, with an occasional potshot by equally rabid anti-Cisco loonies.

To: The Phoenix who wrote (57814)	12/4/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 61433

Gary, >>My guess is that part of the issue is that you're using multiple sources. Do the numbers from each of these sources (once totalled) equal one another. I bet not. What does that tell you? That tells you that these reports are not precise..... << Isn't this the bottom line? Truly, how accurate can any of these reports be? They can all be combined to prove a case for different sides. My opinion, and I'm still learning, is that you have to take what you can get from all the data, try to filter out the noise as best as possible, maybe just stick with only the "absolutely" obviously true facts, and use all the other intuitive knowledge we have about the other companies, network technology, and technology trends. With all this, we get closer to the "truth". I have to say, if Mr. Fun is talking with other analysts who do this for a living, and are in constant contact with inside company sources, then he may have a base of information we should be extremely willing to obtain, and at least open to hearing him out. This is provided his contacts are quality professionals of course. Let's face it, we're outsiders in the dark, trying to spy inside the company.:-) joe