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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elwood P. Dowd who wrote (42878)	1/10/1999 12:57:00 PM
From: Lynn	Respond to of 97611

El, This article makes a good case for CPQ to hold onto AV. The more I have been thinking of it lately, the more I have been thinking I would rather have CPQ keep AV than sell it off in an IPO or distribute it to us, the shareholders. There are actually a lot of CPQ shareholders who would not be happy getting shares of AV because they do not invest in the internet high-fliers and would be uncomfortable having AV in their portfolio. This would present them with deciding to keep or sell the new shares. Selling could mean some pretty hefty capital gains for people with a low cost basis in CPQ already because in a spin-off, the new company's and original company's shares get their cost basis reallocated--like when T spun-off the Baby Bells then later, LU. Lynn

To: Elwood P. Dowd who wrote (42878)	1/10/1999 1:05:00 PM
From: Kenya AA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

El: Do you know when that article was written? I feel like I've read that (or something very similar) before - back in December maybe. K

To: Elwood P. Dowd who wrote (42878)	1/10/1999 2:21:00 PM
From: Richie	Respond to of 97611

El........... The more I think about it, the more I think CPQ should hold CPQ..... as the article says "who else can bring customers to you door"...... with AV they can sell servers and if the order is big enough, free advertising on AV. Not a bad idea really. RichieH

To: Elwood P. Dowd who wrote (42878)	1/10/1999 3:43:00 PM
From: Night Writer	Respond to of 97611

Amen. AV is and will be more valuable to CPQ in the future. If they didn't have it, they would have to invent it. NW

To: Elwood P. Dowd who wrote (42878)	1/10/1999 3:57:00 PM
From: fooledalot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

El, you certainly do a great job at finding interesting articles/ info/links, etc. While I would LOVE to obtain shares of AV as a spin-off by virtue of my CPQ holdings, I believe the article is right in that determination of valuation of the new AV "company" and its corresponding shares would be difficult (and consequently, undervalued) As such, the benefit in terms of # of AV shares received per CPQ shares owned would not be huge. On the other hand, IF EP will make a bonafide committment to using AV as a major play in an e-commerce strategy AND he brings in management to plan and implement this strategy outside of the traditional CPQ "culture," I think the role of AV in CPQ's "total enterprise solution" direction truly has the potential to clearly differentiate CPQ from any other company. In the intermediate and, especially, long run, this option will offer far greater shareholder value, IMO. The big keys and questions will be in execution, which history suggests EP should pull off.