...is an artifact of the market increasing. Don't be fooled -- there is no news on ASCL. It's the same crappy company, led by the same crappy management, doing absolutely nothing to increase shareholder value.
I am comparing ASCL to well known software companies. ASCL is most definitely a 'viable' company.
Why isn't Dell on my list? Because the list was purely a sampling of a number of software companies I tend to track. You want Dell? Sure:
Dell: 7/13/2000 -> 52.9
Dell: Now -> 29.5
Diff -> -44%
Any questions? Heck, let's try a bunch of companies with revenues more in line with ASCL's current revenue, and in somewhat similar businesses. Let's go with Brio, Sagent, Microstrategy, Business Objects, Cognos, DataMirror, Hummingbird, and Informatica. To review, remember that ASCL is right around 0%. Currently, with the slight decrease today, they are at -5%.
BRIO : -74%
BOBJ : -35%
COGN : -54%
DMCX : -61%
HUMC : -46%
MSTR : -88%
INFA : -62%
SGNT : -94%
ORCL : -59%
ITWO : -91%
SY : -24%
EMC : -77%
HPC : -26%
No one's doing anything with these other than using them to put things into perspective. Your claim is that PG is incompetent because he hasn't grown the stock since his being selected by the board. All I've done is show you, time and time again, that just about EVERYONE has been losing the bank during that same time period. The fact that ASCL hasn't LOST any stock value during PG's tenure is a very good thing when compared to the numerous similar and/or competitive companies in the same space. Most of these software companies have lost an average of about 50% during that same time interval.
Don't think I need to show you much more. If you can't see the plain and obvious facts in front of your face, you are as clueless as they get.
As mentioned numerous times before, PG has done a pretty decent job at maintaining value through a very difficult time in the industry. He's gained a tremendous cash advantage, and entered into numerous partnerships. His challenge will be to use those as the starting blocks to future success.
What did you do? Write the book on how to lie with numbers? You keep comparing ASCL to viable, and for the most part, money making companies. ASCL is neither. Why not compare ASCL to the plethora of dotcoms that went bankrupt and tell everyone how great PG has done when compared to them. Why isn't DELL on your list, or EBAY, or a host of other high tech companies? Because you're the type to mislead readers with "selective" comparisons. How can you compare a company selling at $4 to those selling at 15 or 20 or 65? Comapanies that were grossly overvalued onlky a year ago? ASCL (IFMX) was never overvalued because it was priced for it potential success in the market. And $4 is what the street priced it at, knowing full well that it wasn't worth any more than that! So your reasoning is flawed!
Could have ASCL gone to zero? Sure. But the company had over $1.0 billion in the bank -- so just on its cash holdings it was worth nearly $4 which is what it is worth today!
If PG has done anything, he has lowered the value of the company and there is now an even greater likelihood that the company will bleed more money than before. He has less cash, still a huge float, no earnings (in fact losses), and no solution to what appears to be a terminal situation.
My cost basis on ASCL is 12.5 cents. I have held the stock since 1988. My cost basis on SUNW is 62.5 cents, also started in 1988. I hold more shares in each of these companies than you could ever hope to hold, and could probably buy and sell your position(s) 10000 times over.
Now I know that as an ASCL employee you are required to spout the party line. However, get a dose of reality. This company is a sinking ship! It's captain can't tell the difference between an ocean or a river, and it's just a matter of time before he shipwrecks all of us.
The sooner you recognize his incompetence, the sooner shareholders pressure the BOD to terminate his contract, the sooner we get real leardership, then the sooner we will have an opportunity to make some real money.
Now get back to work you slacker. PG is calling you. He needs his shoes shined!
Once again avoiding all the facts that show you to be the clueless individual you are...
Let me refresh your memory... Let's look at what this 'incompetent' CEO has done during his tenure, in comparison to many others in the same business:
Company Stock 7/12/2000 Stock Now Diff
ASCL 4.4 4.4 0%
HPC 13.4 9.9 -26%
SUNW 46.9 14.6 -69%
MSFT 79.9 68.1 -15%
ORCL 37.9 15.4 -59%
INFA 40.3 15.3 -62%
ITWO 70.8 6.7 -91%
SY 21.5 16.1 -24%
EMC 76.3 17.7 -77%
Man, aren't you glad you have PG as your CEO. You claim to have a significant stake in this company, which has to be one of the more amazing statements I've ever heard. You've considered PG to be incompetent from Day 1. Yet, in a very short time, he took your $4/stock to $8. Why you didn't get out then, given your beliefs about the company, are one of the great mysteries of life.
However, had you sold your money then and put it into one of those companies led by their 'thoughtful, visionary, market understanding' CEOs, you'd be crying pretty loudly right now.
PG has, during his tenure as a whole, kept your investment stable whilst the market has had a huge downfall. If you had $100,000 in ASCL when PG took over, you still have about $100,000. If you had put that into ORCL, you'd have only $41,000. SUNW, just $31,000, etc... On average, had you invested in those 8 companies listed above, you would have enjoyed an average loss of roughly 53% of your initial investment over the same timeframe.
But then, based on your comments over on the SUNW board, you are apparantly someone who has lost a lot of money already. Still hoping for 17??
But then, for a guy touting ENRON, you are hardly the 'guru' you claim to be...
But, once again, you'll just somehow avoid those facts...
<While I think his gamble has paid off thus far, it was a gamble and he still needs to make that gamble pay off long-term.>
Jeeze, now were talking about PG's gambling with our money. You just made my points more relevant regarding PG's incompetency. We don't want a CEO who gambles -- we want one that is thoughtful, has a vision, and has some capacity to understand markets and the sale of goods. But instead as you have aptly note, we have a gambler.
Fire PG (we don't need gamblers) and hire someone who knows how to run a business.
Fair enough bug...
At this point, I'd say PG has actually done well for all involved... investors, customers, and employees. The true test will be, as you say, where the company stands in a year.
While I think his gamble has paid off thus far, it was a gamble and he still needs to make that gamble pay off long-term.
While the numbers don't lie, they don't tell the truth either. All those companies were highly valued on 7/13 because of their potential to increase growth as well as inflated because of the tech bubble... If the market thought your company had room for growth, your stock got an inflated price.
IFMX was already deflated, there was little room left to fall.
Then, PG had a garage sale. He sold the pots & pans, the dishes, the furniture... so he could make a few more mortgage payments. Yep, valuable assets and IBM scooped them up... good for IBM. Unfortunately, ASCL is left with a house with one chair and a lamp. Not much to work with but lots of cash to pay the mortgage.
To be fair, lets revisit this a year from now and see where those comparisons would be. My guess is that ASCL will be roughly the same while those others will have rebounded significantly.
Good points - if we do a "what-if" on IFMX having stayed whole, I think it would have been sold to someone second-class, for stock instead of cash, and the "buyers" stock might not have done as well as ASCL's has.
This coulda-shoulda-woulda chit-chat is not something real investors do - if they're unhappy, they go elsewhere.
When IBM customers start buying some DataStage as their ETL, likewise SAP, and it shows up in that quarter (I expect Q1 of 2002 at earliest, and then not full-bore), ASCL revenues will rise, and so will the stock. The rise in IBM indicates, perhaps (let's hope) that business is going to better, relatively speaking.
Recall, again, the article I posted a few days ago about weakness in the app server area.
"... is an artifact of the market increasing."
Fair enough statement IG. However, to make this statement, you must also agree that the the converse is also equally true. That if ASCL's runup is due to the market increase, then it's corresponding run-down was equally weighted as a factor of the overall market downturn.
And sure enough, looking over their 3/6m and 1/2yr profiles, it's pretty close...
And, as always, there is the ever popular challenge...
If 1 year ago, you could have put your life's earning into ASCL, the Nasdaq, the Dow Jones, Informatica, Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Sun, HP, or even the S&P, which would have you done the best in...
Yep... suprise, surprise, surprise... you've done better by having your money in ASCL over this last year than any of those others...