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: Mel Boreham who wrote (7062)	2/4/1999 5:03:00 PM
From: FuzzFace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

Cramer on today's Naz selloff: Hmmm, looks like the Nasdaq seller might have finished. In checking with every major OTC desk every five minutes in the last hour, I did not find a single large seller. In fact, after the Advanced Micro (AMD:NYSE) news came out, there were large buyers of Intel (INTC:Nasdaq), as people recognized that AMD may be faltering in its next generation of chips. In other words, the selling was all derivative, all stemming from a program designed to sell all the favorite names that have propelled this advance. You will hear people blame bonds for this selloff. That's just plain stupid. The drug stocks were actually an oasis of "strength" and they trade with the bonds. You will hear people blame the wild Internet shenanigans, the red rovers, as I now call them. But that's wrong too. In fact, the Net wasn't that volatile. Someone wanted out. He wanted out more than anybody wanted in. And when he was done, he wanted to be sure he left his tire tracks all over the backs of anybody who tried to call the bottom. Making things worse, camp followers piggy-backed, and what could have been an orderly selloff just became a flat-out rout. Me? I dodged the high explosive, but my ears are ringing. Have to see whether the same selling comes back tomorrow. If it does, then the barrage will be dealt with and the prices will be cheaper and more fetching. No, this is not the Silver Lining Department speaking (like that Greed & Fear character that speaks in haughty third person over the weekends). Today was hideous. That said, I would have loved to have seen what it looked like without the high-explosive program. Maybe tomorrow he comes with some white phosphorus. Stings, deadly, but lacks the impact of what he threw at us today. I feel good that I held out to the bell to buy. I feel bad that if this guy comes back, I am not done buying!! (A word on "he": As I have said many times, I have no idea who did the selling, whether it was one big account or two accounts. Or whatever. What I do know is that the selling was concentrated in the futures, not the cash market, and the market makers never saw lots of merchandise for sale. Just 10,000s and 15,000s from "away," which fits the pattern of futures spill-off.) thestreet.com

To: Mel Boreham who wrote (7062)	2/4/1999 5:57:00 PM
From: HRP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

Mel, Thanks for posting a transcript of Scott Flaig's presentation. At first blush it is quite positive. However, to me, it presents several concerns regarding constraints. Flaig cited the following constraints: 1. A media constraint for Zip250. Flaig reported "have both written and handshake agreements of their commitment not only to meet Q1 demand but to exceed it." 2. A ramp up constraint for the click drive. Flaig reported "will have some limited constrains in the 1Q99 time period". These statements imply that the constraints will be limited to Q199. Sounds good so far. But then he says "We expect our operating model to hold in 1999, from quarter to quarter may be below or above our model due to seasonality and constraints." Is seasonality now a potential cause of results below expectations not only for Q1 but for Q2 and Q3 as well? And, is there currently a possibility that constraints may continue after Q1. If I owned IOM on the evening of the next conference call, I certainly wouldn't want to hear during that call that Q2 results will be less than expected because of either seasonality or constraints. Could you imagine the opening price for IOM on the next day if the above concerns were not already factored into the price. My opinion is that a $7.00 price for IOM does not reflect these concerns. hrp