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 : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DJBEINO who wrote (26062)	3/17/1999 10:53:00 AM
From: Spartex	Respond to of 42771

The earnings outlook upgrade from ML is very critical in providing the push in price for Novell over the next year IMHO. When analysts start talking numbers like 70 cent, 80 cents, etc. This is getting very close the the $1/year mark for a software company, and that is HUGE. Plus it shows strong earnings growth from 1999 concensus of approximately 48 cents. 75cents (YR2000) - 48 cents (YR99) = 27 cents growth in earnings. 27/48 = 56% growth even upping YR99 earnings to 52 cents. 27/52 = 52% Then giving NOVL a 50 p/e for earnings growth, for YR2000 of 75 cents 50 x 0.75 = $37.5/share closer to Stephen Dube's $40 12-month price target. Is ML analyst just being very conservative on P/E's, and hence their 12-18 month $30/share target? We're just $4 dollars away. Seems they are the same way with evaluating YHOO, AMZN and AOL valuations-- conservative. But we're no where close to that atmospheric level. Regards, QuadK

To: DJBEINO who wrote (26062)	3/17/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Paul Fiondella	Respond to of 42771

This may be old news but its worth reposting Posted 26/01/99 2:55pm by John Lettice Windows NT could triple enterprise upgrade costs - report Our thanks to our good friends at Novell for drawing a recent Giga Information Group report to our attention. By a massive coincidence, the report gives Windows NT one hell of a kicking. Giga describes Windows 2000 as vapourware, points out that companies therefore have to go with NT 4.0 (which of course is what Microsoft recommends and funds via OEMs as a Windows 2K preparation strategy), and concludes that "a wholesale migration to Windows NT Server 4.0 will cost, on average, two to three times more than upgrading to NetWare 5.0." Giga's data, the outfit stresses, is based on NT's performance "when installed as the enterprise operating system across the entire corporate intranet/extranet." As far as Giga is concerned NT remains a "superior departmental server" - that however is bad news for Microsoft and good news for Novell as well. Microsoft pitches NT as scalable enough to run an entire enterprise network, whereas Novell says you can run NT at a departmental level if you like, but you really need NetWare 5.0 to handle the whole enterprise (and of course its departmental NT servers). Says Giga (which may not be getting any work from Redmond for a while): "Giga has spoken with several large corporate accounts that attempted to fully replace their existing network operating systems (NetWare, Unix, OS/2 Warp Server and even legacy Banyan Vines) with Windows NT 4.0 and were forced to stop in mid-upgrade because they could not achieve the same level of enterprise functionality with the Windows NT Server." This won't change, Giga reckons, until Windows 2K ships with the vital new components of Active Directory, advanced clustering and scalability features and Kerberos security. Today NT "is simply not the functional equivalent of more established operating systems such as NetWare and Unix." Particular higher cost areas for NT cited by Giga include the need for more hardware, greater network admin expenditure and the need to buy additional third party products to achieve the same level of functionality as currently found in NetWare and Unix systems. So you've got to buy twice as many NT servers for the same number of users, while the underlying protocols also affect performance. NT servers fall over more often, and take twice as many administrators. Plus NT ones cost more. Giga also suggests wait and see as being the best strategy for Windows 2000's claimed new features, and recommends you don't upgrade until you're through the Y2K issue, and that you wait some more "until at least the first Windows 2000 Service Pack ships." =================================== THe British with their tabloid press mentality get right to the heart of the matter. I would hate to be the guy that bet his position in the company on implementing Win2000 "companywide". Look for those unexpected Y2K problems with NT to appear around December 16th, 1999. Incidentally has anyone checked out the size of NT Service Pack 4!!! My system was downloading for hours. What do they do rewrite everything?