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.

Non-Tech : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Munroe who wrote (8642)	3/30/1999 2:50:00 PM
From: BBG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10072

Latest from TSC's H. Greenberg.... Speaking of which, more Iomega insanity: Enough, already, I know! But the story continues to unfold. The latest twist: Longtime bull Joe Besecker of Emerald Research downgraded the stock to a neutral, based on a quarter that he says is well below expectations. He says he expects the company to lose 3 cents a share in the current quarter, with the year coming in at a profit of 25 cents per share (down from his previous estimates of a positive 2 cents and 41 cents, respectively). Besecker adds that he believes it's time for the company to "better articulate" its long-term strategy. Good point, especially since the company's just-released 10-K disclosed that backlog at the end of January had tumbled to $71 million from more than $200 million a year earlier. The company also disclosed that it has, once again, rejiggered its agreements with its bankers as they pertain to the required minimum level of EBITDA required for its fiscal first and second quarters. The last time the company redid a bank deal was last June, "and we delivered on everything we said we were going to do," says Treasurer Rob Simmons (a straight shooter if there ever was one). "...However, we told them we needed more room here, which is normal." Normal, maybe, but not a good sign at a company that trades at such a hefty multiple to its disk-drive peers and its book value. BBG

To: Jim Munroe who wrote (8642)	3/30/1999 3:49:00 PM
From: Bill Fischofer	Respond to of 10072

Zip disks need lower prices, not more advertizing At current unit prices folks buy disks only when they absolutely need them. I've owned a Zip drive since 1995 and there are many times I would have bought more disks except the price made me think twice. The other thing which is holding back disk sales is IOM's ill-considered policy of only selling them in bulk quantities. Sell them for $4.99 each and make single-unit packs widely available and disk sales will explode. 10-packs are OK for commercial use but too much to swallow for individual consumers.

To: Jim Munroe who wrote (8642)	3/30/1999 11:56:00 PM
From: Robert Neville	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

Well said, Jim. I think Iomega must also be aware of the need to teach the consumer what to do with that new built-in Zip--if they want to sell disks, that is. If I were Glore, I'd want to get operations/QA issues thoroughly under control before launching a marketing blitz. Accordingly, I'm trying to keep the bitching down to a dull roar for now, 'til I see whether that's the case. After all, the guy hasn't been CEO for even 6 months... Sunray

To: Jim Munroe who wrote (8642)	3/31/1999 12:57:00 AM
From: Brian Cunningham	Respond to of 10072

"The concern for OEM owners that have no idea what to do with a Zip needs to be addressed." I have serious doubts that an advertising campaign to "educate" OEM Zip owners would spur sales. Surely, most people have no trouble determining that slot next to their floppy drive is not a toaster and probably takes storage media. Those who don't buy media more likely fall into the beginner low-end user category. They should become buyers as they become more computer literate and accumulate valuable data. Patience is the key. You cannot reasonably expect OEM users to have the same high initial tie ratios as aftermarket Zip drives. I also think it would be suicidal for IOM to cut disk prices significantly. They virtually own the market and should be able to maintain high profit margins on their disks. If a serious competitor comes along, they can respond with price decreases. Until then keep the price near current levels. Zip disks are not true razor blades, they are reusable. If IOM sells large quantities at a low price they risk satiating future demand.