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 : DOCS - A TURNAROUND PLAY -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Pascoe who wrote (998)	3/7/1999 5:09:00 PM
From: Sultan	Respond to of 1156

I look at this deal, and HUMC has hinted this already, as HUM now has three lines of business. Connectivity Software, Business Intelligence and DM/KM. It is more about size and economy of scale as a software company then product synergy. Sure DM/KM will now be able to access BI data as well as any other but that is the extent of it. If people think there is more to it then 1) They know more about it then apparent to me 2) I no longer understand basic bread and butter software business and 3) Probably should just invest in companies that make and sell shaving blades or something. Actually 3 as an option would have made me rich. If I remember correctly, the CEO did say at annual meeting couple of years ago that his goal was to make every one, employees, share holders very rich. Millionaires or some such term was used. This was at the meeting where a lot of share holders grumbled about his salary+bonus hitting 600k+. May be he just changed the focus a bit since all these ungrateful investors are always snapping at his heels anyway. Like revising the goals a bit to do the best you can.

To: Michael Pascoe who wrote (998)	3/7/1999 10:43:00 PM
From: Sultan	Respond to of 1156

Message 8194816 Message 8194891 Looks like HUMC is warming up to the merger with the usual condition.

To: Michael Pascoe who wrote (998)	3/8/1999 3:03:00 AM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1156

Hey Michael, what do you really think? You must have an opinion. To: Sultan Kabani (997 ) From: Michael Pascoe Sunday, Mar 7 1999 4:42PM ET Reply # of 1000 Negative talk from the HUMC thread: Message 8183104 (which contains) But David Beck, an analyst with TD Securities Inc. in Toronto, said Hummingbird's acquisition of PC Docs strays from its stated strategy of focusing solely on its business intelligence products. "We're somewhat cautious as this thing unfolds," said Mr. Beck, adding that it's "unclear" whether the two companies make a good fit. Can't wait until Beck weighs in with something less wishy washy. Ralph Garcea, an analyst with Scotia Capital Markets in Toronto, said following through on its vision will be Hummingbird's greatest challenge. "They have the tools separately that can do what they're talking about, but can they deliver on this vision?" Mr. Garcea asked. "That's going to be the key to this deal." Ok, now we have someone suggesting that if they can't deliver, its a bad thing. Hard to agree with that. What's his point? Does he rate their chances as low? Any factual information one way or the other? Analysts worry about the difficulty of integrating the companies' technologies and the dilution of Hummingbird's earnings per share. At least a specific concern, this one over dilution. Too bad the writer doesn't follow up with the best/worst case scenario - is the dilution sensible given a set of circumstances and what is the companies chances of following through. Yup, negative talk alright. Hardly. It is mushy talk at best! Too bad there are not more analysts that think and talk straight. I have little use for most. By the time they issue anything definitive the writing, whatever the story is, will have been on the wall for some time. I have no problem at all with dissecting this to the finest point, but you do seem to be quick on the draw to highlighting anything, and I mean, anything, that might be perceived as negative. Why is that? Or is it just my perception? Of course, I can be accused of doing the opposite, although I feel I do speak my mind, and certainly I offer some detail with my observations. I'm comfortable with the disclosures I've made with respect to my relationship with the company. Or am I just owly tonight? (OT for Canucks: And will Glen Clark really resign?)