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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (98841)	2/13/1999 4:20:00 PM
From: Lockeon	Respond to of 176387

Chuzz - Glad to see that you agree that something is not quite right here. Was thinking that I may be getting a bit too suspicious and negative in my view of Niles after I came across that piece about how Niles said that Dell had a fantastic finish just a few days ago, and posted it on this thread. Am still not sure that the fellow is just misguided and not nefariously manipulative but that is something else... Anyway, thank you for your insights (have bookmarked your posts about DCF).... Have a GREAT day....

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (98841)	2/13/1999 4:52:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Paul,Gabriel,anybody can you pls take a crack at this please. Now we keep hearing about all these data from various sources,Dan- dumb-ass-Niles,Ashok-the swami-Kumar,IDC,DATAQUEST and my mother-in- law even,but how do you reconcile those numbers with this following statements from Wolf of Dillon Read. Anybody wants to take a crack at it.Thanks. CHARLES WOLF, TECHNOLOGY ANALYST, WARBURG DILLON READ: Nobody knows what the numbers are. I mean, Dell does not provide guidance on their revenue. It sells direct to its customers, so there's no way to check whether its sales are strong or its sales are weak, other than to get comments from the company that would indicate that. Now, the company's not talking because they're in the quiet period before they report on Tuesday.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (98841)	2/13/1999 6:33:00 PM
From: stock bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuzz, re:<<There are any number of issues that are inconsistent, not the least of which is a report previously quoted on this thread that pointed out that just a few day ago Nile said Dell had a fantastic finish to the quarter.>> Can you direct me to the report? I would like to read this report. Thanks, Stock Bull

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (98841)	2/14/1999 1:32:00 AM
From: Gabriel008	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuzzlewit, Thanks for your feedback. Regarding the caveat on the IDC data due to the 1 month lag [Dec 31 vs DELL's Jan 31] I had a lengthy conversation with IDC concerning this very subject in October. I couldn't figure out how they came so close to the real unit volume that DELL reported given they only captured 2 months out of every 3 in each new quarter. IDC indicated that although they reported on a quarterly calendar basis they stayed in contact with the company [read DELL]and actually 'calendarized' DELL's data. That is, they took the incremental January vs October volume and included this in their quarterly report. In January this report, which was due to be issued Jan 29, was delayed an additional week. Therefore, most of DELL's 'shortfall' should have been included in this report. I tend to believe IDC's numbers since they have proven to be remarkably accurate over the last 3 years that I have used them. The 100,000 unit discrepancy between the BBRS report and IDC is puzzling. What is more so, however, is the 'missing' Data Storage numbers. I love a good mystery. Don't You? We'll know who did it on Tuesday! Regards, Gabriel