To: Mohan Marette who wrote (94012 ) 2/2/1999 4:38:00 PM From: Gabriel008 Respond to of 176387
Extra* The Dinging of Dell Creates a Battle of Bluster By Herb Greenberg Senior Columnist 2/2/99 1:40 PM ET More from the trenches: Came off as a ranting lunatic and blathering idiot all rolled into one this morning on CNBC's "Today's Business." (Yeah, yeah, so what else is new?) Couldn't shut myself up when I got on the subject of the way companies are griping about the SEC's new get-tough policy and the reaction to the mere mention in this column of Piper Jaffray's Ashok Kumar. The audacity of companies to say the SEC is getting too tough. The blind faith of investors who think Dell's (DELL:Nasdaq) stock is without risk. Down here in the trenches, you just know you're witnessing an event in the making. You just know that somewhere, somehow, the amount of money that will be lost will be incomprehensible. (Of course it felt that way last week, last month and last year!) So, what about Dell? Dell is one fabulous company. Michael Dell will go down as a visionary for his ability to slip through the middle and beat an arrogant industry at its own game. And as a PC manufacturer, Dell has executed exceptionally. But critical comments by Kumar and others have nothing to do with the excellence of Dell as a company or the genius of Michael Dell as a CEO or the ability of Dell to pull off its game plan without a hitch. It has to do with the value of Dell's stock and whether that value can be maintained if quarterly sales momentum continues to slow. But to hear the true believers, there will be no dinging of Dell. "You and Kumar are clueless," writes reader Greg R., who insists he isn't being blindly optimistic. And he says that it wasn't the prospects of a split driving Dell's stock, as this column and others have suggested, but "the realization that Dell continue to dominate. ... Computer sales are better than ever, and it's primarily Dell. ... Dell is unstoppable!" Maybe Dell as a company is, but at some point, even Dell the stock has its limits.