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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hagar who wrote (20935)	1/19/1999 10:28:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 77397

>> ATM core products and ultimately an optical world without Sonet then TLAB offers little in products. << A valid factor to consider, Hagar. Good point. Perhaps TLAB offers little in the way of forward looking products in the IP domain, but that's why TLAB needs an internet co like CSCO. In contrast, TLAB would avail itself to a huge presence with broad visibility into carrier buying circles, which are by far unlike any that can be typified in the enterprise space.Talk about cultural divides... ! CSCO doesn't play well in this game, yet, with those who possess carrier-like cultural persuasions, except within the inter-networking and ISP subsidiaries who posses a CSCO mind set, to begin with. But they are dwarfed in numbers by their switch-oriented counterparts, and in most instances out-voted by those at the top of these organizations, still. CSCO needs to be at the point of convergence where the DS-0 boxes and OC-48 cages are being transformed into the IP parameters of the next model. Companies like TLAB can bring them to that space, while paring down and migrating their traditional product lines at the same time. But your point is a valid one, and one that I'm sure is being weighed constantly in the tradeoff analyses by the guys with the pencils and erasers.

To: Hagar who wrote (20935)	1/19/1999 10:56:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 77397

Hagar, I'd like to temper my last statement in message #20936 by stating that perhaps TLABs would gradually pare down, and migrate their traditional product lines. We/I tend to get caught up in the hype of IP at times, and sometimes lose sight of the fact that we're talking about oil tankers and aircraft carriers here, of the largest order. SONET and Digital Cross Connects (DCSs), like POTS, are not going away for a long while. As a result of the increased demands being presented by Internet traffic, among other factors, SONET and DCS sales are increasing. Maybe Mr. Fun can tell us what that trajectory looks like, since my information is somewhat dated. But it's going up as we type. While they may not account for increasing shares percentage wise compared to IP oriented wares over time, their numbers continue to rise, nonetheless. It's the same old "it's not a zero sum game" argument, revisited. Network architectures which depend on DCSs will continue to grow in many instances, in other words, albeit with some incremental feature modifications such as DWDM front ends that are now very apparent for larger nodes, going forward. It follows then, that TLABs would also lend a hand with the bottom line due to these factors, but in a gradually shifting way. Comments are always welcome.