x
Optical/IP

Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits

A week after Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO) announced a $2.5 billion inventory write-off (see Cisco's Inventory Woes Mount), investors and their lawyers are taking aim at the company and its officers (see Cisco Faces Another Suit).

It's common for shareholder lawsuits to emerge after a precipitous drop in stock price, regardless of cause. Cisco's case is interesting, however, because it is being hit by several suits targeting its accounting practices at a time when those very practices are coming under increased scrutiny.

“This is one of the most egregious abuses of insider trading that we have ever encountered,” says William Lerach, a partner at the law firm Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach LLP, which filed suit against Cisco on Friday.

Milberg Weiss is one of at least two firms that have already filed federal lawsuits in California and in Maryland on behalf of shareholders, alleging that Cisco and its officers violated federal securities laws by disseminating false and misleading information about its products, financial results, and prospects for fiscal 2001 and 2002 and beyond.

Investors typically file shareholder lawsuits after a company pre-announces negative earnings news, says Daniel Sommers a partner at Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll, a firm that also handles shareholder lawsuits. Foundry Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: FDRY) and Lucent Technologies Inc. (NYSE: LU) have also been targets of similar lawsuits since the market took a nose-dive back in December (see Foundry Slapped With Shareholder Suit).

Many of these suits never make it to trial, because they are either dismissed or settled out of court. But analysts who follow Cisco think that shareholders could have a good case against the company.

“This was the biggest inventory write-off in the technology sector ever,” says Gina Sockolow, an analyst with Buckingham Research Associates (BRA). "I think the inventory write down and the implications on future earnings are so great that the suit might actually have legs. But what it comes down to is what they knew and when they knew it."

The lawsuits center around Cisco’s accounting practices, which the suits claim are in violation of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules.

According to the suit filed in California, Cisco provided excessive financing to fledgling CLECs (competitive local exchange carriers) like American Metricom, Digital Broadband Communications, Harvardnet, PSINet, and Vectris Communications even when its officers knew the service providers could not meet very minimal convenants with Cisco Systems Captial, the financing arm of the company. The suit alleges that Cisco offered these liberal terms to generate more business for the company. But many of these providers defaulted on their loans and never paid for the products that were shipped.

“In order to inflate prices of Cisco stock defendants caused the company to falsely report results for at least the 4th Q 99, 1st Q 2000, 2nd Q 2000, 3rdQ 2000, 4th Q 2000, 1st Q 2001 and 2nd Q 2001 through improper revenue recognition including recognizing as sales shipments of shell units of products not yet developed, manipulating revenue on financing arrangements with certain of its indirect customers including CLECs and failing to adequately accrue for bad debts, thereby materially overstating its revenue and net income during the class period,” reads the lawsuit filed in California.

But more than taking on risky business, the suit also contends that Cisco tried to hide this bad debt by not accounting for it properly. The suit says that the company violated the FASB Statement of Financial Standard No. 5 that requires the estimated portion of uncollectable receivable accounts be accrued in the period in which it becomes evident that it won’t be collected.

So when did company officers know there was a problem?

Sockolow says signs that Cisco was in trouble were surfacing this summer and the CLEC situation had become clear by October.

“You have to wonder if they were really caught by surprise,” she says. “The balance sheet had been falling apart since last summer. The payables and receivables had been growing, and the company was struggling to get its inventory under control. I’m not privy to all the details in the balance sheet, but it makes you wonder.”

The suit also alleges that Cisco was shipping incomplete boxes to customers and booking them as revenue, shipping the fully operational pieces in later quarters. In the summer of 1999 it allegedly shipped 14 switches to software maker Worldwide Web in Miami, Fla., recognizing $400,000 for each device. When the technicians turned on the box, nothing happened, says the complaint, and Cisco agreed to send the appropriate blades to the customer in a subsequent quarter.

The practice of shipping boxes without the appropriate blades continued into 2000. Back in November Light Reading reported that Cisco had problems shipping blades for its ONS 15454 optical transport due to a component shortage (see Cisco's Optical Customers Face Delays).

But this point may actually not mean anything in court. Why? The accounting standards do not specifically state that companies cannot recognize revenue on boxes that are incomplete or not functioning, says Doug Reynolds with FASB.

“The standard assumes that these are finished products,” says Reynolds a practice fellow at FASB. “But we don’t specifically state that anywhere. Application of the rules varies. The rules are straightforward, but it’s not as easy as it sounds to apply them.”

Cisco hasn’t issued a comment on the lawsuits and was unavailable for comment. Its stock ended at $17.33 today, down 9.5 percent from yesterday’s close.

-- Marguerite Reardon, senior editor, Light Reading http://www.lightreading.com

voyeur 12/4/2012 | 8:28:12 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Has anyone seen this?


CISCO MAY HAVE SOLD US$500 MILLION OF WRITTEN-OFF INVENTORY

Cisco may have sold as much as US$500 million of the $2.5 billion of inventory it wrote off two weeks ago, according to an analyst at Dresdner Kleinwort Benson. "We have heard from two sources in Japan that Cisco was able to sell up to $500 million of the $2.5 billion of the inventory write-off it announced on April 16," said Dresdner's Ariane Mahler. If the rumours prove to be true, said Mahler, it raises questions about the credibility of Cisco's management, and could attract the attention of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Any sale of goods written off just two weeks ago would be a "contradiction" of statements made by chief executive John Chambers regarding the level of demand for the components, explained Mahler. AFX (AP), May 1, 2001


I just thought it might be pertinent to the subject of lawsuits.


restonrangers 12/4/2012 | 8:30:04 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Can anyone give me an update?
pstafford 12/4/2012 | 8:30:21 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I raed the article and then turned to the board and I must say I don't understand much of this discussion. The aricle was clearly factually based, referencing the text of the lawsuit, with no judgement passed. Sure these suits go down all the time; I thought the angle that this one might have some actual merit was well-supported.

So what if lots of companies pull these sorts of vendor-financing and revenue-recognition shenanigans? It's still at the very least unfair to shareholders, and when a bellweather like CSCO does it, they should be called on it. There is little question they were doing it -- I've been hearing these rumours, sometimes from CSCO employees, for months. Everyone knew the CLECs were a house of cards; this amounted to a big gamble that they'd hurt competitors badly enough that it would mask the damage to their own balance sheet.

Not that I think shareholder suits are such a great idea. If you were dumb enough to be long CSCO, it's probably best to simply take your medecine. A little snooping at trade shows easily uncovered their malpractice... The real criminals here are the wall street analysts who knew, or should have known better, and still routinely cranked out "strong buys" on this turkey.

DCITDave 12/4/2012 | 8:30:24 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Um, I don't hate our readers. Where do you get off saying something like that?

I disagree with our readers sometimes. Like now, for instance.

But there's no hatred here.

P.S. A.D.'s parody of MTV's Fear was brilliant. Great fun.
Hanover_Fist 12/4/2012 | 8:30:24 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits no...no...

I referred to LR's removal of offensive information on this message board...
cfaller 12/4/2012 | 8:30:25 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits "Way to go, Steve. Once again you clearly demonstrate your true intentions...never bog down news analysis with meaningful facts..."

What meaningful facts are being excluded? Just because the analysis isn't kind to Cisco doesn't mean it's not factual.

What's wrong with you people?
Hanover_Fist 12/4/2012 | 8:30:32 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Reading the posts on this article is awe-inspiring.

LightReading - the National Enquirer of the Technology Industry.

Steve Saunders: "Boo...hoo...hoo...If people pick on MY website, then I'll just pull all those posts off MY message board - there. That'll teach those nasty reader a lesson. I only want people to agree with me to be allowed to post - snif...whimper"

Way to go, Steve. Once again you clearly demonstrate your true intentions...never bog down news analysis with meaningful facts...
Tight Underwear Kills! 12/4/2012 | 8:30:34 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I hope you're not another masquarading type. There are enough of those on these boards.

Face it - LR is the only stop in town for certain things, like industry overviews.

The owner makes no bones about the companies that bother him. Don't know why he chooses the companies he does - most say because of advertising. But I admire him for his honesty - he writes to these boards in fact.

Welcome to the Real World.
The Andy Dick Show 12/4/2012 | 8:30:35 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits ...but you guys gotta admit, the Andy Dick Show is the funniest show on earth.

Comments?
The Andy Dick Show 12/4/2012 | 8:30:35 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Whoah man...alot of hatred going on here. I don't remember this stuff way back mid-last year when I last read.

The readers hate LR, LR hates the readers. What's going on, man?

LR writes some wicked-good stuff. What's with the vendettas goin back and forth? Is it because it drives traffic here? I can't make out these LR guys at all.
brichter 12/4/2012 | 8:30:39 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Quick, let's sue LR!! They're going bankrupt!! What will happen to the value of my free registration?? My finances will never recover!!
brichter 12/4/2012 | 8:30:39 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits WHOAAA, Trigger! Who wasn't a multimillionaire by 30? Speak for yourself, clown!!! I just don't happen to be a multimillionaire right now.(ROFL)
Hey, what goes up must come down, and usually goes up again( unless your name is Humpty-Dumpty!). Have a great year, and a better one next year. Go Bulls!
brichter 12/4/2012 | 8:30:40 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Yeah, he got busted. Put up 5 million in cash,and his 1.6 million dollar house( although that's chump change for a house around here,40 year old 2 bedrooms will get a cool million in this market!). I personally hope they string him up from the flagpole in front of 170 W. Tasman Dr.
brichter 12/4/2012 | 8:30:40 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Gee, another brain. Would you rather have layoffs like Cisco, where 30% are temp & contract workers, or like Nortel, just cut 20,000 out of the core? The others are scrambling so hard, they up the numbers weekly! As for the lawsuits ( notice the plural), The same law firm filed 39 others like it in the same week. The copiers must have been working overtime! ( paste defendant's name here).



Oh really! What a sheltered life you have led! I don't know whether to laugh or to cry at all of this whining about dashed dotcom dreams. So maybe you won't be able to retire at 30. Is that really such a horrible thing? Try to adjust to life outside the dream world of the 90s. Stocks crash, companies get into trouble, life goes on. Get over it. Your parents went through it. Your grandparents went through it. Now it is your turn. Stop whining and blaming the messenger. It makes you look like a spoiled little 90s brat who has never seen a slowdown or a company under press scrutiny before.


>Cisco's write offs, vendor financing deals, bad debts, defaults etc are all a small percentage when compared to the revenue and cash flow they generate.

Small percentage huh?! Tell that to the 8500 people they are laying off. You know what disappoints me the most about Cisco management? The fact that they seem to have such an interesting combination of hubris and cowardice (Where is the courage to face a hostile Wall Street if you know you are on the right track?). When they were the darlings of Wall Street they were as arrogant and overbearing as a company can get. The minute they hit some stormy weather and their stock price tanks they go straight to the layoffs (and they weren't even completely forthright about that--take a look at the press releases over the time period in question). They have a saying here in the Lone Star State: "He's all hat and no horse". When the "Cisco kid" rode into Dallas he had a very big hat on. He was going to take the town by storm. He was going to build a big campus and become a force to be reckoned with in the telecom business. Such hubris! Leaving two buildings unfinished after such grandiose plans were touted less than a year ago says alot about Cisco. It says too much hat, too little horse. And despite the generosity of the severance package offered Cisco employees in Dallas I think it will be a while before Cisco can approach a telecom engineer in Dallas with a job offer without getting a smirk in return.

And by the way, Photonic, trying to show disrespect for the author of the article by calling her "Maggie" says more about your character than hers. Grow up and stop whining.
cfaller 12/4/2012 | 8:30:46 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits "...But, having reviewed past articles..."

What articles are you referring to? Anything specific?

"...which offer consistently horrendous coverage of non-advertisers..."

Again, anything specific that you feel was unfair? There's a difference between being unfair to a company and reporting bad news about a company. I'm surprised you don't know the difference.

..."he and his writers go above-and-beyond factual reporting to use so much rumour in writing on these companies..."

What, precisely, was not factual about this article? You lose credibility when you generalize.

I don't suppose you were a communist political officer in a previous life, were you? LR reported facts, and you're accusing LR of being anti-Cisco simply because those facts did not put Cisco in a favorable light.

That's bulls**t, and you know it!
voyeur 12/4/2012 | 8:30:51 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits "LR has two things down to a science - their high-quality technology exposees, and the way they treat Cisco, Nortel and others. I hope they break their science of attack on these companies, because my company should be truthfully reported on like any other."

Truth is in the eye of the beholder. If you want "truth" go to your company's web site. I don't particularly like all that LR writes about my company, but also take what they write, along with what our PR folks write, with a grain of salt.

Part of what makes LR interesting is their analysis. They do their best to use facts, but realize analysis also involves conjecture, and that is where they get your goat. If you don't like it, then disagree, but don't try to take them down because or shut them up because you do. That, of course, goes both ways.
Cutiepie 12/4/2012 | 8:30:51 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Wow - Ron Crotty has Light Reading editorial down to a science.

No doubt, LR has educated me about optics through its columns and other features better than any textbook or class.

But, having reviewed past articles, which offer consistently horrendous coverage of non-advertisers, I think Steve owes it to his readership to reveal why he and his writers go above-and-beyond factual reporting to use so much rumour in writing on these companies.

LR has two things down to a science - their high-quality technology exposees, and the way they treat Cisco, Nortel and others. I hope they break their science of attack on these companies, because my company should be truthfully reported on like any other.
cfaller 12/4/2012 | 8:30:52 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits How much time do any of us want to spend dissecting a post that Ron Crotty wrote about LR? No, it wasn't a "study," so let's just call it what it was- a post. By the way, Zaffire has advertised on the LR site, and they received a rating of 1. I guess that one slipped by you, eh?

If you don't like LR, go somewhere else, but please, stop with the whining about free speech, journalistic integrity, blah blah blah! At least try to pretend that you're not pissed off CSCO shareholders!
paulglen 12/4/2012 | 8:30:54 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Don't you guys have any work to do? No wonder LR has negative coverage of your companies. Instead of developing products you are making silly web pages "proving" the LR caters to its advertisers in editorial content. One suspects that you are as rigorous at developing products as your are in "proving" bias, which is to say, quite weak. If you are representative of the quality of people your company can hire, well, I'd say the problem is obvious.
dlharding 12/4/2012 | 8:30:54 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Take the study down, dismiss it as non-factual and written by someone with an axe to grind or without credibility.

Hmmmm...sounds a lot like what the readership has been accusing the staff here of doing over the past several months. Only problem is that those impacted by bad stories can't yank the stories down.

The stats of the study do tell a tale....albeit a cloudy one. Some of the companies who get slammed, deserve it. They tell stories, they do not deliver and they have screwed people out of a lot of money due to ignorance, incompetance and or dishonesty. However, it does seem odd that the other companies do not take the hits when there can be no claims that they have it all figured out either.

The policy of taking people down for being "offensive" is clear hypocracy when you consider the slanted coverage that takes place. (Yes, this site does some good things as well mind you and you can get news here)

Can't have it both ways folks....... you have now compromised the boards in a way that stifles opinions and you can't do that. Telling people who criticize you that they have to behave in the way that you want them to is contrary to your whole way of life. Being willing to criticize is what you started out as.



russ4br 12/4/2012 | 8:30:55 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits vineyards00 wrote:

"Just in case you wanted to view that survey again (cause I know you can't view it on you own website) you may view it at the following url..."

Vineyard,

This so-called study begins with the following paragraph "Below is part of an extensive study that an intern on my team put together."

Come on, an "extensive" study put together by an "intern"? How did he assigned the grades - darts or dices?

And this is the same guy who complains that LR lacks depth ...


ranon 12/4/2012 | 8:30:56 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Can somebody tell me how was this rating calculated?

And let us give Steve a chance of rebuttal before we hang him.

Come on Steve. If you don't reply than you have something to hide.
tonkajoe 12/4/2012 | 8:30:57 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Steve,

Do you know if any of your pals in Cisco Marketing/PR will be packaged in the 8,500+ being let go. You really seem to have them pissed at you.

Keep up the good work.
Opto-Prozac 12/4/2012 | 8:30:58 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I just got the following URL sent to me:

http://www.geocities.com/ron_c...
vineyards00 12/4/2012 | 8:30:59 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Hey Stevie, (and any other interested readers)

Just in case you wanted to view that survey again (cause I know you can't view it on you own website) you may view it at the following url...

http://www.geocities.com/ron_c...

glad to be of service.

Da' Puffer
Opto-Prozac 12/4/2012 | 8:30:59 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Also had my contribution pulled. It had no profanity, so slanders, no inaccuracy.

Steve - what is going on there? Why are you killing Freedom of Speech?
hippo 12/4/2012 | 8:31:00 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits How much time do you think is going to take to type up a few one line messages? Say, maybe 2 minutes?

And in fact, I "quitted" from one of the companies not advertising on this site not long ago, and I'm making 30+% more, thank you very much.
vomonquan 12/4/2012 | 8:31:00 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits It's not the first time LR removes messages. It happened to me twice. I feel that it is a very disturbing attitute. If LR aspires to be a respectable news magazine it must strive for higher journalistic standards. Of course, to be fair, LR has the god-given right to be concerned about potential lawsuits against it ( with or without merit). But again there is a saying: if you are afraid of heat you should not go in the kitchen.
Frankly I have no idea what criteria LR uses to purge messages, or report companies uneven-handedly ( ie: why it is harsh to some and very accomodating to others). And it would help if the editor stands up and lays down the rules publicly.

regards,
optical 12/4/2012 | 8:31:00 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits vineyards00,

I only wish I could get my company to advertise with LR but we're running a tight ship with the recent environment. Interesting times.

optical
optical 12/4/2012 | 8:31:01 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits hippo,

were you recently laid off? because you have alot of free time on your hands and you really seem bitter. Are your options that much under water?

LR, keep up the good work!
optical 12/4/2012 | 8:31:01 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits If you think LR is so unfair, stop reading it and posting messages. Better yet, start your own website if you think you can do it better.

Keep up the good work LR!
vineyards00 12/4/2012 | 8:31:01 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Optical... you must work for one of the companies that advertises on this sight. If they would post that study again I could see who that may be. but being as the information was so "false" they had to remove it. what a shame.

I agree however, keep up the good work LR... your doing a marvelous job!!!
hippo 12/4/2012 | 8:31:01 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Another "source" close to LightReading said LR is afraid of handling the "truth"...
hippo 12/4/2012 | 8:31:02 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Someone told me LightReading is going bankrupt...
vineyards00 12/4/2012 | 8:31:02 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Stevie,

I'm glad to hear that Light Reading has suddenly become so concerned about the accuracy of the information that is posted on their site. Careful Stevie, you would hate to set a presedence for censoring all infromation on your site that is "false"...

Oh and Stevie, one other comment...
I suspect that if the numbers in the study (which was obviously a "fake" study, right Stevie) reflected generously on LR you would have removed it from the message board, RIGHT??? At least,if you wanted to remain objective, you would had had to remove it. And we all know how objective LR is.

Sincerely,
"Da Puffer"
hippo 12/4/2012 | 8:31:02 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits You might just as well take down the whole message board. How many of the messages posted here are "true" according to LR??

Hell, Lets take down LR altogether, many of the info was "false", too!
lightreading 12/4/2012 | 8:31:03 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Have you read this lately??

Disclaimer: This board does not reflect the views of Light Reading. These messages are only the opinion of the poster, are no substitute for your own research, and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose. The anonymity of the user cannot be guaranteed.
lightreading 12/4/2012 | 8:31:03 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Oh come on Steve. All of the information posted here is 'false' in that it is all here-say. You should just de-activiate all of the message boards if you are going to censor them based on what you think is false or true. Be fair. I can't censor the false information presented about my company, why should you?
Steve Saunders 12/4/2012 | 8:31:03 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits It was taken down because the "information" in it is false. It is not a real study, obviously.

lightreading 12/4/2012 | 8:31:04 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits REPOST THE LIGHTREADING STUDY!!
hippo 12/4/2012 | 8:31:04 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I read it, but it was taken down soon after... Why was LightReading so afraid of showing it???

Did it consist of any offensive languages? I don't think so. Then why was it erased???

We need justice!
Belzebutt 12/4/2012 | 8:31:07 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Same people who are suing Nortel...
flanker 12/4/2012 | 8:31:07 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Thank you tink.

These really look like nuisance law suits. I wont deny that some firms play games with their accounting, but we cannot expect perfect information. The cost of compliance is too high.

tink 12/4/2012 | 8:31:08 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Milberg Weiss was the first of 6 law firms who have now announced class action suits against Cisco for securities fraud. Milberg Weiss currently has similar litigation pending agains the following companies:

Adaptive Broadband Corp. (Nasdaq:ADAP)

Adv. Technical Products (Nasdaq:ATPXE)

AK Steel Holding Corp. (NYSE: AKS)

Amazon.com, Inc. (Nasdaq:AMZN)

Anicom Inc. (Nasdaq: ANIC)

Applied Micro Circuits (Nasdaq:AMCC)

Ariba, Inc, (Nasdaq: ARBA)

Aspeon, Inc. (Nasdaq: ASPE)

AT&T Corporation (NYSE: T)

Atchison Casting Corp. (NYSE:FDY)

Aurora Foods, Inc. (NYSE: AOR)

Autodesk Inc. (Nasdaq: ADSK)

Avista Corp. (NYSE:AVA)

AVT Corp. (Nasdaq: AVTC)

B2B Internet Holdrs Depositary Receipts (AMEX: BHH)

BMC Software, Inc. (Nasdaq: BMCS)

Bridgestone Corporation (Nasdaq:BRDCY)

Broadcom Corp. (Nasdaq:BRCM)

BroadVision, Inc.(Nasdaq:BVSN)

Calico Commerce, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLIC)

California Amplifier, Inc. (Nasdaq:CAMP)

California Software (Nasdaq:CAWC.OB)

CapRock Comm. Corp. (Nasdaq: CPRK)

CapRock Communications, filed 12/20/00 (Nasdaq:CPRK)

Christie, Int'l. and Sotheby's Inc.

Cisco Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:CSCO)

Comdisco, Inc. (NYSE: CDO)

Commtouch Software Ltd. (Nasdaq:CTCH)

Copper Mountain Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: CMTN)

Covad Communications Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: COVD)

Critical Path, Inc. (Nasdaq:CPTH)

Crossroads Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:CRDS)

DaimlerChrysler AG (NYSE: DCX)

Del Global Technologies Corp. (Nasdaq: DGTC)

Deutsche Telecom AG (NYSE: DT)

Emulex Corporation (Nasdaq:EMLX)

Entrust Tech. Inc. (Nasdaq: ENTU)

FINOVA Group Inc. (NYSE: FNV)

Firestone Tire Class Action

FirstWorld Comm. (Nasdaq: FWIS)

FLIR Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: FLIR)

Foundry Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq:FDRY)

Fruit of the Loom (NYSE: FTL)

Gateway, Inc. (NYSE:GTW)

Guess?,Inc. (NYSE:GES)

Hamilton Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: HABK)

Harmonic Inc. (Nasdaq: HLIT)

Hastings Entertainment (Nasdaq: HAST)

Honeywell International Inc (NYSE:HON)

i2 Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: ITWO)

Iasiaworks, Inc, (Nasdaq: IAWK)

Indus Int'l., Inc. (Nasdaq: IINT)

Intershop Communications AG (Nasdaq: ISHP)

Intrenet, Inc. (Nasdaq: INETE)

JNI Corporation (Nasdaq:JNIC)

Keithley Instruments, Inc. (NYSE: KEI)

M&A West, Inc. (Nasdaq:MAWI)

Macromedia, Inc. (Nasdaq: MACR)

MAX Internet Comm. (Nasdaq: MXIP)

Maxim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq:MAXM)

Mitek Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: MITK)

MP3.com, Inc. (Nasdaq:MPPP)

MTI Technology Corp. (Nasdaq:MTIC)

NCI Building Systems, Inc. (NYSE:NCS)

Network Associates, Inc. (Nasdaq:NETA)

New Era of Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: NEON)

New Focus, Inc. (Nasdaq:NUFO)

Nice Systems Ltd. (Nasdaq: NICE)

NIKE, Inc. (NYSE:NKE)

Nortel Networks Corp. (NYSE: NT)

NorthPoint Communications (Nasdaq:NPNT, NPNTQ.OB)

Nuance Communications (Nasdaq:NUAN)

OfficeMax, Inc. (NYSE: OMX)

Opus 360 Corporation (Nasdaq:OPUS)

Oracle Corporation (Nasdaq:ORCL)

Pacific Gateway Exch. (Nasdaq: PGEX)

PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: PHSY)

pcOrder.com, Inc. (Nasdaq:PCOR)

Pilot Network Services, Inc. (Nasdaq: PILT)

Pinnacle Holdings, Inc. (Nasdaq: BIGT)

Pinnacle Systems, Inc.(Nasdaq: PCLE)

PlanetRx.com, Inc. (OTC BB:PLRX.OB)

Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. (NYSE:PPD)

PRI Automation, Inc. (Nasdaq: PRIA)

PSINet, Inc., filed 12/28/00 (Nasdaq: PSIX)

QLT, Inc. (Nasdaq: QLTI)

Quintus Corp. (Nasdaq:QNTS)

Razorfish, Inc. (Nasdaq: RAZF)

Red Hat, Inc. (Nasdaq: RHAT)

Sagent Technology, Inc. (Nasdaq: SGNT)

Schering-Plough Corp. (NYSE: SGP)

Scientific Learning Corp (Nasdaq:SCIL)

Sensormatic Electronics Corp. (NYSE:SRM)

Sonic Innovations, Inc. (Nasdaq: SNCI)

Southwall Tech Inc. (Nasdaq: SWTX)

TEAM Communications (Nasdaq:TMTV)

TenFold Corp. (Nasdaq: TENF)

Terayon Comm. Systems (Nasdaq: TERN)

The Chubb Corp. (NYSE:CB)

The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO)

THQ, Inc. (Nasdaq: THQI)

Turnstone Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:TSTN)

U.S. Interactive, Inc. (Nasdaq: USIT; USITQ)

Unify Corp. (Nasdaq:UNFY)

Upgrade Int'l Corp. (OTC BB: UPGD)

VA Linux Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: LNUX)

VantageMed Corp. (Nasdaq: VMDC)

VARI-L Company (Nasdaq: VARL)

Ventro Corporation (Nasdaq:VNTR)

Versata, Inc. (Nasdaq:VATA)

VisionAmerica (Nasdaq: VSNA)

Visual Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: VNWK)

VISX, Inc. (NYSE: EYE)

Winstar Communications, Inc. (Nasdaq:WCII)

Worldwide Xceed Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: XCED)


jimbo59 12/4/2012 | 8:31:12 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Flanker,
I have heard that the lawsuit has been further appended to include the following:

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, the recent technology crash was a direct result of Cisco's virtual web based visibility having become virtually invisible.

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, Cisco Systems conspired with Lucent Technologies and Nortel Networks to become competitors, thereby causing a continual flux in stock price.

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, Cisco Systems did further conspire with the NASDAQ, and as a direct result of that conspiracy, all Cisco stock options did become worthless as a result of the market downturn.
ranon 12/4/2012 | 8:31:13 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits All of us have to realise that we are not going to be multi millionares by 30.

The bubble has burst. It was great while it lasted.

We have to go back to growing our way slowly and surely.

It will take a year for the industry to get back on it's feet, even then the spectacular growth rates of the past are history.

In another 5 years there will be another bubble, in a different industry, till then, all the best.
Dill Weed 12/4/2012 | 8:31:14 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I heard from a dude from Cisco over lunch while I was at NGN Ventures that this guy "Crazy Jerry" has gotten Lucent AND Cisco, Tachion and a couple other start-ups to join this case against LightReading.

Is this stuff true? C'mon - there's gotta be some pissed off Cisco guys who can tell us more.
flanker 12/4/2012 | 8:31:14 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits An internal memo leaked by a law firm suing Cisco:


THE OFFICES OF MATZOH, PORTOBELLO & ARROZ

The offices of Matzoh, Portobello & Arroz today announced that it has filed a class action complaint on behalf of all persons who acquired Cisco Systems, Inc., securities between August 9, 1999 and April 15, 2001, inclusive (the
"Class Period").

The complaint alleges that:

UPON RUMOR AND HEARAY, Cisco's share did go up, down, up and then down some more during Class Period.

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that prior to the Class Period, Cisco's shareholders operated on the belief that Cisco shares would never decline,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, and although we have no evidence of the foregoing whatsoever, that during the Class Period Cisco did use deceptive accounting practices,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that during the class period Cisco conspired to manage earnings,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that Cisco did conspire to acquire a non-existent company to hide excess profits,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that such company, Monterrey Networks, never existed,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that the address provided by Cisco for Monterrey Networks was actually an abandoned horse farm,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that there is no such thing as a "wavelength router",

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that Cisco conspired with Lucent and Nortel to sell such imaginary "wavelength routers" to imaginary customers,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that Cisco's wrote off $2.5 billion in inventory,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that such inventory
is actually left-over office equipment from the Monterrey acquisition,

UPON RUMOR AND HEARSAY, that such "wavelength routers" and office equipment have market value as landfill, ship ballast or fireproof home insulation,

We do charge Cisco Systems, Inc., and its top officers and directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.




























samTheFish 12/4/2012 | 8:31:18 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits More details about Gordon's alleged escapades are at theregister:

(In a nutshell running phony stock deals to scam Cisco customers and running some offshore shell business called "Cisco Systems" that had no relation to the real Cisco.)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/c...

samTheFish
optical-tracker 12/4/2012 | 8:31:19 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits It's true...Robert Gordon, former VP of Business Development
dwdm 12/4/2012 | 8:31:19 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Folks, you need to look at the positive picture.
Yes I agree that Cisco shouldn't have grown so
much that fast that has to resort to layoffs,
however with last years growth it I bet it ain't
easy to turn around. From a financial perspective,
as a share holder, I'm glad that the company is
cleaning up fast by doing a large layoff and
the large inventory write off. This clearly is a
sign that the csco gets it, and they're doing the
right thing. On the other hand, I read about
Nortel, for example

http://www.msnbc.com/news/5631...

Now these are serious issues. Or even Lucent
that last month was begging for a loan to
survive. Cisco on the other hand is still
profitable and has a positive cash reserve, over
10 billion dollars, to put things in perspective.

It sure sucks for someone to loose his or her
job. But again look at the positive side, these
guys got a 6 months severence package which is
very generous. I was part of a layoff 6+ years
ago and I know how it feels.

BTW, I'm not a Cisco employee, but a shareholder.

kristeen 12/4/2012 | 8:31:20 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I heard the same thing.....Another optical news sight reported it pre-maturly and had to yank the article. Anyone know anything?
gardner 12/4/2012 | 8:31:21 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits >I just love it when LR strings in friends and family to provide a "pseudo-even keeled" analysis of their drivel.

I'm just a reader of this online journal like you. I am neither a friend nor family of anyone at light reading. I know it comforts you to think that anyone that calls you on your childish rants must be related to someone at LR but it just ain't so.
drone387 12/4/2012 | 8:31:21 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits >What's the track record of these law firms?
>how many cases get thrown out and how many >actually have merit?

Someone did a study of these class action lawsuits once. The vast majority get settled out of court since it is cheaper to settle than fight. The lawyers get most of the money in legal fees and the class members get literally a few bucks. One firm countersued Lerach, won hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, and the CEO is some sort of folk hero. As long as firms settle, these guys will stay in business.
flanker 12/4/2012 | 8:31:21 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits ehhh, I think the issue here is whether shareholder litigation is newsworthy or just ambulance-chasing.

What's the track record of these law firms? how many cases get thrown out and how many actually have merit?


58 12/4/2012 | 8:31:22 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I rarely look at these message boards, but when I do I always manage to get a good laugh. Are optical industry professionals statistically less mature than peers in their age group?

Anyways, while I disagree with all the ranting muck-raking comments, I do believe this article was biased to the point of being non-informative. The article begins by noting the abundance of shareholder lawsuits following stock plunges, but then proceeds to quote the lawyers and the filing verbatim with hardly an ounce of insightful commentary to serve as a reality check.

Yes, this lawsuit happens to come at an interesting time for Cisco, but to automatically create an association between the two which validates the merits of the suit is naive. The story behind the inventory write-off at Cisco undoubtedly has a lot more to do than simply fraudulent accounting, and a story that provided a deeper perspective into the events and issues leading up to the write off might have been valuable. But as it is, this article is simply a sounding board for lawyers who spend 90% of their time filing frivolous lawsuits which don't look much different than the one being showcased here.

Other than occasional one-sided articles like these, I congratulate you guys at LR for providing excellent insight to this highly complex industry.

And guys like Opto-Prozac, go find a hobby or something, you have too much time on your hands.
Opto-Prozac 12/4/2012 | 8:31:22 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I just love it when LR strings in friends and family to provide a "pseudo-even keeled" analysis of their drivel. The Blind defending the Naked.

Lick my Prozac, baybe!
optinuts 12/4/2012 | 8:31:24 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits light reading has nothing going for it but its message boards. their newswire doesnt even have lucent's earnings report on it yet although its todays biggest story. their analysis is naive and their strategy is to sensationalize their reporting so it gets their readership worked up.

the more people fall for this, the more steve and scott can smile about. so, if you don't like something, just shut up and stay put. thats the best way to answer back.
gardner 12/4/2012 | 8:31:25 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Why is it that folks like Opto-Prozac think that by demeaning the authors and editors of Light Reading with childish nicknames (e.g. calling them Maggie and Stevie) they can undermine the credibility of the stories they write and publish? Grow up Opto-Prozac. Not every story is going to be favorable to your heros in the corporate world. I don't know where your anger comes from but childish displays of it only undermine your own point. I happen to enjoy the articles in Light Reading. Not all are as accurate or as unbiased as I would like but no one is perfect, especially under deadline and dealing with imperfect sources of information. You ought to try to get an article out on deadline sometime Opto-Prozac. The job is made even harder with all the corporate spin-meisters trying to bury the ugly details. I applaud the staff of Light Reading for the excellent job they do in the face of attempts to prevent the truth from getting out when it ain't pretty. It's one thing when the corporate PR flaks try to stonewallthe press, it is, after all, their job but when the amateur corporate apologists get started pushing the party line for free I can't help but be disgusted.
Opto-Prozac 12/4/2012 | 8:31:26 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Stevie:

Wow - what a tight ship you run there, "not allowing editors to post under aliases"! Embodying the highest principles in journalism, you are. You definitely warrant a Pullitzer.

...it's fascinating that only Scott Raynovich and a couple others defend their articles - and they tend to write the most factual, non-sensational ones...and they also tend to understand the material technically...

Why is that, Stevie?
rafaelg 12/4/2012 | 8:31:26 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I never cease to get amazed by the ludicrous and the ignorant...

LU, NT, CSCO, etc. In this era of suit-happy people and easy-riders, it is expected to cover your losses at any cost. Isn't it? It's disgustinly pathetic. Ohhh poor me...I lost money in the stocks... I am a victim...

I guess if I lost money in a roullette table, I could sue the establishement for misleading me to thing that I could win.

Welcome to Fantasy Island...
Steve Saunders 12/4/2012 | 8:31:27 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits "And why do you only contribute to these boards through aliases?"

Opto-Prozac

Light Reading editors are not permitted to post under aliases.

Unlike you.

If you don't like people posting under aliases, why are you using one?

Steve
gardner 12/4/2012 | 8:31:27 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits >This article is the biggest piece of junk you will find any where.

Oh really! What a sheltered life you have led! I don't know whether to laugh or to cry at all of this whining about dashed dotcom dreams. So maybe you won't be able to retire at 30. Is that really such a horrible thing? Try to adjust to life outside the dream world of the 90s. Stocks crash, companies get into trouble, life goes on. Get over it. Your parents went through it. Your grandparents went through it. Now it is your turn. Stop whining and blaming the messenger. It makes you look like a spoiled little 90s brat who has never seen a slowdown or a company under press scrutiny before.


>Cisco's write offs, vendor financing deals, bad debts, defaults etc are all a small percentage when compared to the revenue and cash flow they generate.

Small percentage huh?! Tell that to the 8500 people they are laying off. You know what disappoints me the most about Cisco management? The fact that they seem to have such an interesting combination of hubris and cowardice (Where is the courage to face a hostile Wall Street if you know you are on the right track?). When they were the darlings of Wall Street they were as arrogant and overbearing as a company can get. The minute they hit some stormy weather and their stock price tanks they go straight to the layoffs (and they weren't even completely forthright about that--take a look at the press releases over the time period in question). They have a saying here in the Lone Star State: "He's all hat and no horse". When the "Cisco kid" rode into Dallas he had a very big hat on. He was going to take the town by storm. He was going to build a big campus and become a force to be reckoned with in the telecom business. Such hubris! Leaving two buildings unfinished after such grandiose plans were touted less than a year ago says alot about Cisco. It says too much hat, too little horse. And despite the generosity of the severance package offered Cisco employees in Dallas I think it will be a while before Cisco can approach a telecom engineer in Dallas with a job offer without getting a smirk in return.

And by the way, Photonic, trying to show disrespect for the author of the article by calling her "Maggie" says more about your character than hers. Grow up and stop whining.
jimbo59 12/4/2012 | 8:31:28 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Opticaluser,

You hit the nail RIGHT on the head! Lucent got slammed for some of these very same practices (albeit without the web based visibility Cisco uses, but that's neither here nor there...).

The sins of the past are just now catching up. Because it's now squeeze time in the telecom sector, that's the only reason the issues are now coming to light for all telecoms...


Cisco has boasted on numerous occasions of their visiblity into their business on a daily basis. Their relentless focus on weekly/daily forecast updates from the sales staff reveals that Cisco should have known in Calendar Q4 or before that there business was slowing down and that their customers in the CLEC space were not paying their bills.
cable_guy 12/4/2012 | 8:31:29 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits congratulations...you can regurgitate what you read in the Wall Street Journal
Hanover_Fist 12/4/2012 | 8:31:29 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits From the Wall Street Journal Tech Center:
SAN JOSE, Calif. -- A vice president of Cisco Systems Inc. has been arrested on charges that he embezzled more than $10 million in schemes related to Cisco's investments in two smaller technology companies.

A criminal complaint filed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in San Jose, Calif., names Robert S. Gordon, a Cisco vice president of business development. The document accuses him of fraud in interstate commerce, with penalties ranging up to five years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.

Mr. Gordon couldn't be reached. A Cisco spokesman confirmed the arrest but declined to make any additional comment.

An FBI affidavit alleges that Mr. Gordon fraudulently obtained 30,206 shares of stock in Internet Security Services Group Inc., a company that Cisco purchased. He allegedly transferred the stock to a company he established in the Bahamas and sold the shares.

The FBI alleges that Mr. Gordon transferred about $260,000 of the proceeds into his own account, and used about $5 million in a second fraudulent transaction, involving Spanlink Communications Inc., another Cisco partner. He allegedly arranged a transaction that appeared as if a venture capital firm were investing $5 million to help Spanlink keep operating. After Cisco invested $15 million in Spanlink, Mr. Gordon allegedly received $10 million from Spanlink to redeem the earlier $5 million investment, the affidavit alleges.
lo_mein_noodles 12/4/2012 | 8:31:30 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits

"Maggie, you don't even understand the accounting stuff and yet you write an article on it as though you are a leading expert. All you did is paste stuff from the lawsuit that these wall street lawyers filed. Guess what these lawyers' sole reason for existence is? To file lawsuits like this."

OK...Let me get this straight photonic, You rag on maggie cause she doesn't know what she is talking about...yet she presents you verbatim what the lawsuit states... and then you whine about the lawyers don't know what they are talking about?? So I guess that means nobody but photonic knows what they are talking about?? sniff, sniff...I smell a cisco ass frying in crisco!!! poor lil photon...you can hardly see the light...haha...that was funny!!
Anyway....I don't know whats worse..cisco, or blind investors who cat see the light.
jim_baldwin 12/4/2012 | 8:31:30 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Shareholder lawsuits are nothing new to corporate america. This is probably not the first Cisco has seen either - but who cares?

Nobody is going to bring down an industry by reporting this stuff - you give LR too much credit.

I agree there are probably more of these suits upcoming, but again - who cares? The business fundamentals will win in the end, and Cisco appears to have those in spades. What's the big deal? I'm sure the Wall Street Journal and financial rags reported the lawsuit too...should we slam them too?

<step off="" soapbox=""></step>
Belzebutt 12/4/2012 | 8:31:31 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Didn't LR write about the Nortel lawsuits? And so what if they "copy/paste" from the lawsuit, the article clearly says "alleged". Give me a break, how are you supposed to write an article on a subject if every time you have to make sure to cover all the other possible subjects. Would you like her to include Cisco's balance sheet in every article?
cfaller 12/4/2012 | 8:31:31 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits I heard this morning that a Cisco executive was arrested by the FBI for embezzlement of $10M.

I'm hoping LR will check their sources and report this. I can't wait to see the message boards light up with Cisco shareholders going through the roof!
photonic 12/4/2012 | 8:31:33 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits
This article is the biggest piece of junk you will find any where. All the article does is paste stuff from the lawsuit and pass it off as if hell is breaking loose. PLEASE! Give me a break!

Any lawsuit ever filed against any company after their stock price is depressed reads exactly identical. If you have guts, why don't you paste material from the lawsuits against other companies?

Cisco's write offs, vendor financing deals, bad debts, defaults etc are all a small percentage when compared to the revenue and cash flow they generate.

Compare these same items as a percentage of revenues and cash flows for companies like Sycamore, Redback and other light reading darlings and you will notice that they are in bigger hole than light reading believes they are.

I will bet a lawsuit is coming against Sycamore, which is much deserved that the one against Cisco. I will wait and see if Maggie has the guts to write a similar scathing piece of junk against them.

Maggie, you don't even understand the accounting stuff and yet you write an article on it as though you are a leading expert. All you did is paste stuff from the lawsuit that these wall street lawyers filed. Guess what these lawyers' sole reason for existence is? To file lawsuits like this.

Get real folks.

all-software-are-buggy 12/4/2012 | 8:31:34 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Hello Hello..
This is a free country. This is not china... this is not cuba.. this is the land of the free and the country of the brave...

Lightreading or anybody can question Cisco or any other buggy software/networking company regarding anything ranging from buggy software products to accounting practise. It aint fire..its normal thing...so just relax sir...

If a industry is build on honesty, ethics, quality and moral values..nobody can bring it down...
StartUpGuy1 12/4/2012 | 8:31:34 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Cisco has boasted on numerous occasions of their visiblity into their business on a daily basis. Their relentless focus on weekly/daily forecast updates from the sales staff reveals that Cisco should have known in Calendar Q4 or before that there business was slowing down and that their customers in the CLEC space were not paying their bills.

The real culprit here is the belief by upper management at Cisco that they were immune to any slowdown and that by upping the pressure on their sales teams, they could make up the ANY deficit. With their building boom and hiring binge, Cisco management did not manage their growth in a manner that was consistent with the fiscally conservative heritage that they started from during the John Morgridge tenor at Cisco.

This situation looks alot like the IBM of the late 70's and early 80's. Invicible and Arrogant.
But look what happened to IBM in the late 80's and early 90's.

IBM remade their entire company. Cisco's challenge will be to see if they can make the hard choices necessary for them to remake themselves to the lean mean company that they were during the growth days..

light_saber 12/4/2012 | 8:31:35 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits "When the technicians turned on the box, nothing happened, says the complaint"

Your journalistic ramblings are so unfunny. Get a life.

may the force be with you
aa 12/4/2012 | 8:31:35 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits My opinion:

Whats wrong in reporting things as they are (or will be). Just because you are long cisco doesnt
mean you shamelessly defend everything it does!

The lawsuits only touch a small part of all the
accounting shenanigans that Cisco engaged in in the last 3-5 years. To a financially savvy and
technically capable observer it is obvious that this company's growth spurt was largely a myth
and the balance sheet shows much of that problem. Infact there was an article in Barrons a year or so back (at the height of hype) about a lot of them. These include stock options, acquisitions, financing etc. Look at an article by Bill Parish who has been critical of this company for a long while to get enlightened and to remove the rosy shades from your eyes!
Opto-Prozac 12/4/2012 | 8:31:35 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits Maggie - can you write about technology for once, and not scandal?

I heard you have never worked in any industry even related to telecom/datacom. Is this true?

And why do you only contribute to these boards through aliases?
rcj_98 12/4/2012 | 8:31:36 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits What are you talking about this was a article based on facts. Foundry, Oracle and several other vendors have gotten similar lawsuits. This makes you really think about ciscos practices. As a shareholder of cisco I question them myself. I don't think an article like this will bring cisco any further down than what it already is.
flanker 12/4/2012 | 8:31:36 PM
re: Cisco Socked with Shareholder Suits You are playing with fire. Please stay away from stories like this. You will bring down the entire industry: vendors, operators, investors, analysts, press.

HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE