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: rudedog who wrote (44852)	1/24/1999 10:53:00 AM
From: Kenya AA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

We are all interested in exploring any reasonable line of thinking which may affect our investments. We are not interested on a one-sided discussion by someone whose transmitter is stuck on, and whose receiver seems to have been disconnected. You tell him, doggie! He never did come back the channel stuffing evidence with regard to Radio Shack. Guess he was "too busy." K

To: rudedog who wrote (44852)	1/24/1999 11:28:00 AM
From: isdsms	Respond to of 97611

Bravo!!!!

To: rudedog who wrote (44852)	1/24/1999 1:14:00 PM
From: csm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

Rude, hope you don't mind a real detail Q here. Can you enlighten me on the quality differences between Presario and Armada notebooks. I just checked out a 1255 Presario. I really like the key arrangement, particularly the scroll buttons down there with the Internet buttons although the keyboard is mushy. THere is a 1655 with a 13"TFT that would suit me fine. However, an Armada with similar features is several hundred dollars more. Even more than buying a 4 year warranty for the Presario. I was told by a reseller that the Presarios come in for a lot of warranty work. I'm getting the impression that if I want to keep the notebook for a few years and travel with it I should go for the Armada in spite of the premium of 25% or so. Can you or anyone else comment? Thanks. Stuart. (looking/hoping for $58 within 7 days)

To: rudedog who wrote (44852)	1/24/1999 2:00:00 PM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

Dog, Nice try..... In your role as apologist for CPQ you have gone way overboard in your interpretation of my position. Let me help you out since you seem to be struggling. 1) It is necessary that CPQ's cost structure improve greatly for them to make their EPS number regardless of their revenue. Their profit margin was 1.8% in Q3. It takes a mighty effort to get that to a normal profit margin. 2) Have they been stuffing channels? Perhaps, there is some evidence to that effect. However, it is inconclusive. 3) The merger with DEC did in fact reduce CPQ's working capital. My final conclusion was that they had sufficient lines of credit to permit them to write the severance checks and checks for plant closures. Now you have stated that they reduced costs: "with more than 9,000 layoffs prior to November, and closure of a number of facilities." How do you know this information? What is the source of it? My purpose here is not to stimulate ad hominem arguments but rather get the facts out on the table for discussion. You have admitted that CPQ's financial statements are opaque. I agree.