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.

Non-Tech : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken Pomaranski who wrote (6640)	1/23/1999 2:45:00 PM
From: David Colvin	Respond to of 10072

More backpeddling/justification about your totally wrong $0.02 prediction, eh? The trouble with you Ken is your big ego can't accept the fact that you were simply DEAD WRONG! I've known people like you before. According to them they don't make mistakes.....just everyone else. Get over it Ken......admitting one's mistakes is a sign of maturity. I can tell you this.....people who can't/won't ever admit they are wrong loose credibility with me in a heartbeat. Personally, I don't really care if you were wrong or right.....we all make mistakes. What bothers me the most is your condescending attitude, as if we are all just a bunch of dumb bungling buffoons and need you to "hold court" for us here, perhaps picking up some crumbs of knowledge from the great one. Glad you had a good laugh at my responses, Dave

To: Ken Pomaranski who wrote (6640)	1/25/1999 11:19:00 AM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 10072

>>The fact is the rational that went behind the .02 number was DEAD ON, and from that rational I inferred that I should stay away. Again, no analyst saw this. The GM's were a tad higher than I expected and they stuffed the channel.<< Ken - A conclusion reached using faultless logic, but based upon incorrect assumptions, is still wrong. GM's were a "tad" higher? Doesn't the magnitude by which your estimate missed mean that your model was off by more than a "tad"? Whatever you believe about what the other analysts may have missed, they appear to have hit a few points more accurately than you did. As for stuffing the channel, that's just nonsense. Iomega does not recognize income from channel inventory in excess of four weeks' supply. So if they stuffed the channel they would end up with a lower bottom line, since the costs of the product shipped would accrue in the current quarter, whereas the sales of that product wouldn't be recognized until the following quarter. In fact, the Q4 report demonstrates that Iomega's model can work, and that the company can make money going forward. It also demonstrates that demand for Zip drives and disks has not declined as you have continued to predict it would. What the Q4 report does not show is whether or not the new products which were introduced in the quarter are going to succeed in the marketplace. But it's easy to extrapolate, from the given numbers, that if they do succeed then Iomega will be able to start growing the top line again. In summary, cost controls and increased efficiency will take care of the bottom line, while the top line is showing good potential again. - Allen