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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (45733)	2/4/1999 9:55:00 PM
From: SteveR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Michael:Off subject but, what are your thoughts on HNV. Thanks. First time posting here. SteveR

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (45733)	2/4/1999 10:31:00 PM
From: Dale J.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Mike, thanks for the response. LMOA, I know what you have to go though, the longs do not want to hear any discussion of overvaluation, creative accounting, company propaganda etc..<G> They believe in overly optimistic estimates and then try to justify the valuation based on overly optimistic projections. Red flags are swept under the rug. Oh yeah and a 2 for 1 stock split beats everything. 2for1 splits=Pandemonium <G> Your puts on CPQ were exceptional well timed. I was a little early myself. But its too early to tell, we can still get hurt if the company officials keep telling everyone that CPQ is now an internet company. <G> Dale

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (45733)	2/5/1999 10:00:00 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Mike I don't understand this point: "And even then, nearly all the gain in revenues was "service," which is a highly suspect # even at ethical cos." For several years, Compaq's stated goal has been to expand into enterprise service, going into direct competition with HP and IBM. Thus the Tandem and DEC acquisitions. In fact, the DEC service arm was held up as one of the main reasons for acquiring DEC. Makes sense to me -- the Fortune 500 will need a lot of hand-holding as we roll thru Y2K. So, why do you regard service income as suspicious? You've been right about many things on Compaq. Still, before your head gets too big, I would like to point out in the interest of historical accuracy that you have hated Compaq's slimy guts for at least the last two years (that's how long I've been reading the thread). During that time the stock has gone from about 17 (split-adjusted) to 45.