<<   <   Page 3 / 6   >   >>
dwdm2 12/4/2012 | 10:26:38 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I brahmos, thanks for the insider's info. Here is an outsider's comment: "...now my LU friends tell me even coffee and milk are not being provided, they bring their own mugs to work :)"

While both LU and CSCO are laying off people, CSCO has shown profit, LU is still a fallen giant.

I'd rather have a job than free coffee and milk

AAL6 12/4/2012 | 10:26:38 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I http://www.nypost.com/business...
dwdm2 12/4/2012 | 10:26:37 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I Perhaps big bonus numbers are missing here...? Just a guess
let-there-be-light 12/4/2012 | 10:26:37 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I According to MULTEX, overall compensation in fiscal 2001 of some top execs were as follows:


Schacht, Henry B.Chairman of the Board $1,208,241

O'Shea, William T.
Executive Vice President of Marketing and Strategy; President, Bell Labs

Holder, Robert C.
Executive Vice President

Pat Russo, CEO
joined in the fun too late to be reported, I guess


Chambers, John T.
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director $269,631

Carter, Larry R.
Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice President-Finance and Administration, Secretary, Director $425,712

Justice, Richard J.
Senior Vice President, Worldwide Field Operations $385,962

Richardson, James
Senior Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer $384,608

Volpi, Michelangelo
Senior Vice President, Internet Switching and Services $381,846

I don't know, but something seems wrong here...
WolfLarsen 12/4/2012 | 10:26:36 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I

To tell the truth, I buy the Lucent explanation:

It cost more money to ensure that exec's stick it out...

I'd take Chambers' job for no money and no options.
PhotonGolf 12/4/2012 | 10:26:31 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I
I'd say the Cisco guys were/are bullish, so their execs knew last year the stock was/is undervalued and were not selling. In the LU case, I'm not sure, but I suspect some felt that $6-10 was as good as it will be for a couple of years, so they sold.

Time will tell who is right.

Personally, I've had Cisco since 96, but sold half Jan '00 because I had to. Lucky me, but I still have the rest and feel great about it.

- P
wilecoyote 12/4/2012 | 10:26:29 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I HiTek:

Call me naive...but read the post again: I said Cisco COULD not SHOULD buy their competition out. OK so you're talking about their assets (those of ALA, NT, LU) being worth lots and lots of money (too much for CSCO to afford). Assets are only worth what people are willing to pay for them, and as you know, assets are valued according to marketability (buyers look at what the seller's options are in liquidating an asset and that gets factored into the what are you willing to pay question). So, if these assets were worth anything the market caps would probably reflect that because buyers of equity in these companies would think: "look at the balance sheet. Look at all these assets. I'm buying this stock on book value alone!" Guess what? people are selling, not buying, these dogs. And they ain't thinkin' about no assets, partnuh.

Let's do some more math:

Market caps:

LU $15B
NT $9B
ALA $15B

That's $39 B total. Let's throw in CIEN and JNPR at $3B each, for a grand total of....$45B. Easily affordable if Cisco was willing to sacrifice its own balance sheet. Assets or no assets, you think their shareholders wouldn't take Cisco stock/cash right now? Any/all of these companies would be lucky to be acquired by Cisco but Cisco knows that it can kill them all off one by one if they use their balance sheet wisely.

As I've said in many of these boards, using Clintonesque lexicon: it's about the financing (economy), stupid.
brahmos 12/4/2012 | 10:26:29 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I to be fair, csco became "arrogant" in 98-99
and planned to go LUish with a massive campus in
coyote valley , a township of sorts. a new-Rome
from where consuls and regents would go to rule
the provinces, grand parades in the square and
vassals from other lands would pay tribute!

that got beaten right out of them in 00.

modesty, cunning and frugality.
beowulf888 12/4/2012 | 10:26:28 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I deepciscothroat
Good view of the Cisco Downside. As a recently ex-Cisco employee, you need to balance it with a couple upsides:

1. Cisco is still taking market share at the expense of all its competitors -- just because they suck less ;-)
2. Looking outside the US, there's huge potentials for growth in the Internet and non-standard (i.e. VoIP) telecom technologies (just China alone *could* become the biggest customer for Cisoc products in the world).

On the downside you left out one other item...
11. A bunch of new managers who came on board in the last couple of years, who don't have a deep understanding of (the original) Cisco culture -- a bunch of "yes-men" and "yes-women" who place their careers above the company's bottom-line.


deepciscothroat wrote: 1. Management team are all now Mario cronies or GMs that go home at 5
2. No new growth markets
3. Losses to carriers still not on books. What about the lending bloodbath at Sigma Networks
4. Low-end enterprise is going to Dell and Netgear
5. No successor to Chamber
6. Big losses in Cable sector and nothing happening in Wireless
7 EPS is toast at 8BN share float
8. All of the BD shop invested personally and made money at the start-ups Cisco acquired...their Enron story is still to come out
9. Chambers will have to pay off the class action suits for the 30%-50% guidance he was giving until a quarter ago
10. Morale sucks. I am getting out as soon as we hit 20. Hope I don't get crushed in the stampede. Only people left will be the HP clone
dwdm2 12/4/2012 | 10:26:24 PM
re: Cisco's Chambers Glows at N+I Here is an interesting news release:

Thomson Financial/First Call said 272, or 60%, of the 452 companies that have announced their first-quarter results as of Thursday beat the average analyst estimate.

One-hundred nine, or 24%, of the companies matched expectations, while 69, or 15%, missed analysts' views.


<<   <   Page 3 / 6   >   >>
Sign In