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 : Wind River going up, up, up! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4013)	1/23/1999 6:35:00 PM
From: Scott Kessler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10309

1) According to the 2/1 Business Week, WIND was the top holding in Janus Venture, w/ $1.25 bln in assets (4%) & Pioneer Mid-Cap A, w/ $891,000 in assets (3%). Maybe 1/both sold some/all. 2) As indicated b4, CSFB has no banking rel. w/ WIND --- Deutsche Bank Secs. is their banker -- did their IPO. However, CSFB analyst Mike Kwatinez used to be w/ DBS & is considered the stock's axe for this reason, among others (has a good rel. w/ top competitor MSFT). Note Kwat kept his strong buy & his ests. 3) This situation is reminiscent of PSFT, but PSFT is in an industry which started to slow dramatically -- not the case here! Net appliances, etc. are all the rave. 4) Hopeful that $30 on Fri. was the bottom & could see easy movement higher w/ funds looking for mid-cap value/growth combo. Many rotating out of Nets & large-cap techs -- WIND may be perceived as a very cheap way to play the net (even Schwab thinks it's a Net stock). 5) Co.'s pr was solid. MANU & PSFT disclosed that there were more probs. than originally anticipated in their eventual releases. 6) Agree that co. wouldn't have done split if thought business was imperiled.

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4013)	1/23/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: Greg Jung	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10309

For 8Million shares, a 17 point drop in 15 minutes, etc. I can't believe that mere inclusion would precipitate a 35% drop like that. More likely there was a mid-day meeting with analysts, who suddenly didn't like what they heard. A lot of put positions were put on by principally two institutions (see yahoo for cboe story). I would think it is too well-known of a stock for a simple liquidity bubble. The announced revenues are probably locked in, so if there are single substantial customers maybe one of those went elsewhere - if there is any substance whatever to the drop. Greg

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4013)	1/23/1999 7:40:00 PM
From: James Fulop	Respond to of 10309

>> "Wind River Systems (WIND) is placed in this group of stocks because of the price volitility(sic) and because their software platforms are used in developing the environment for the Internet and for the Intranet." << Price volatility maybe, but that second part would seem to encompass so many companies it seems almost silly. This raising of margin rates for certain stocks is starting to get awfully subjective. And just maybe the raising of those rates itself is causing more volatility... and on and on we go... lol...

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4013)	1/28/1999 9:54:00 PM
From: Allen Benn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10309

You indicated that Schwab sent you the following reason for placing WIND on the high-maintenance list: Wind River Systems (WIND) is placed in this group of stocks because of the price volitility(sic) and because their software platforms are used in developing the environment for the Internet and for the Intranet.<\i> Not true. When pressed, Schwab claims volatility was the only reason for placing WIND on the list. This argument lacks face value validity because there are over 3,000 stocks with greater volatility than WIND. When really pressed, Schwab says other, unmentioned factors may have been considered. When really, really pressed, Schwab says they have the right to put any company they want on the list without explanation. They will not tell you exactly what criteria was used. They will not say a specific factor was not used. This means that the platitudinous reason they told you was not guaranteed to be truthful, and is almost certainly a lie. I believe WIND was placed on the list for reasons having little to do with the stock, but mainly with Schwab accounts that own stock. Schwab has procedures to restrict margin in individual accounts to control risk. However, with WIND, they took the easy way out by adding it to the high-maintenance list. Unfortunately for WIND, it is relatively illiquid, so the high-maintenance flag may well have unbalanced its price equilibrium more than would the flag appropriately placed on a high-flyer like Yahoo!. In a nutshell, your friendly broker, noticing that you had a significant (concentrated) position in WIND, placed WIND on the list, and may have contributed to the acceleration of Friday's crash. Don't feel sheepish about WIND's subsequent volatility when complaining to Schwab; they may well have contributed to it. Allen