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 : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Katherine Derbyshire who wrote (7694)	2/23/1999 7:25:00 PM
From: Jess Beltz	Respond to of 10921

I couldn't agree more. eom. jess.

To: Katherine Derbyshire who wrote (7694)	2/23/1999 10:53:00 PM
From: Q.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

It saddens me, and I bet it saddens Katherine and many others here, to see this fine thread that Cary started in a state of disrepute, sullied by mud-slinging and personal disputes. This sort of behavior is standard fare elsewhere in internet threads, but we've done so much better here, until now. There are so many important things to discuss, such as the prospect for continued growth of orders in the sector, or the valuation of the stocks, or the debt burdens of Asian customers, or the trends in technology. I'd like to discuss them. I propose that all parties with a fight to pick should find another way to do it so that it doesn't appear on this thread.

To: Katherine Derbyshire who wrote (7694)	2/24/1999 9:01:00 PM
From: Demosthenes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Katherine and Justa, Justa mentioned that he heard PLAB was not real busy, but that they weren't standing around hanging their laundry out to dry on the UBeam. Evidentally they continue evaluate the UBeam with regular use. I was a bit disheartened to hear AZ say on the Q4 CC that no Ubeams had to date been "accepted," even though he mentioned there are 10 companies interested in the UBeam. Justa implied that the engineers at PLAB testing the UBeam have their carreers hanging in the balance. I understand that the Ubeam technology is 2nd generation Bell Labs, while the ETEC system is 1st generation. What I'm assuming now is that acceptance of the Ubeam is a bigger deal than I orinally thought. I'm assuming that perhaps the slow acceptance of the Ubeam at PLAB is largely due to 1) slowness of their business at the moment as well as 2) reluctance of PLAB to make a decision before they have to. AZ did mention on that CC that getting the UBeam accepted was harder than he originally thought. I assumed at that time that the implication was that the technology had faultered. But after Justa's post I'm beginning to put more weight in the above 2 points. After all, AZ did say in the Q3 CC that the Ubeam was operating in a "superb" fashion. Laura at UTEK has been increasingly hard to reach and I haven't talked to anyone there who can help clarify this since last year. Do either of you have any knowledge that could shed some light on this subject? Your comments are always appreciated. Best Rgds, A Loyal Utekian