Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Cadence Design Systems Inc. Message Board

edabarsteward 34 posts  |  Last Activity: Sep 10, 2013 2:02 PM Member since: Jul 25, 2008
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    BEAT ON TOP AND BOTTOM

    by baumanncynde Aug 22, 2013 4:22 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Sep 10, 2013 2:02 PM Flag

    Just as well they didn't fire the execs huh?

  • edabarsteward by edabarsteward Jan 24, 2012 10:01 AM Flag

    Heard Cadence AEs are expecting good bonuses, and sales stopped booking orders - sounds good. Anyone else hearing the same?

  • Reply to

    MGMT. HAS TO GO.

    by baumanncynde Mar 31, 2011 3:34 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Apr 8, 2011 3:58 PM Flag

    When do you think current management was there? Not in 88 for sure...

    Do you think your recommendations have any effect at all? Investors on this board own a miniscule percentage of MENT stock. This board is all about making a profit on owning/selling the stock.

    It doesn't matter whether anyone on this board thinks management should go or not. More pertinent questions might be:
    - Do you think the stock will rise or fall or stay the same? and why?
    - Do you think someone will come in to buy MENT?
    - Is MENT growing market share?
    - Are Icahn's activities affecting the stock price?
    - What about the recent upgrades by analysts?
    All of this is just my way of saying, stop with the moronic posts.

  • Reply to

    MGMT. HAS TO GO.

    by baumanncynde Mar 31, 2011 3:34 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Apr 8, 2011 3:48 PM Flag

    Another high value comment Cynde. Thanks

  • Reply to

    MGMT. HAS TO GO.

    by baumanncynde Mar 31, 2011 3:34 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Apr 4, 2011 2:35 PM Flag

    Yes, you make a good point but your point applies to the majority of stocks and the broad markets - so why single out MENT? Personally, while I have been buying MENT over the last few years, I have done very well. So for me, I don't really see the benefit of Icahn's activity. It's fair to say that investing in the stock market in general since ~2000 has been a wash. In the decades prior to 2000, the trend has been onwards and upwards.

    For my part, I wouldn't put my money into MENT for a 10 or 20 year investment. This just goes to show that your time horizon matters. Most people on these boards have a short time horizon.

  • Reply to

    Who to believe?

    by sam13aa Apr 1, 2011 10:27 AM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Apr 1, 2011 4:08 PM Flag

    Many companies use these kind of notes to raise cash. The benefit to the purchaser is a guaranteed rate of interest with the upside of some capital appreciation in the future should the stock price exceed the future set price. For MENT, the benefit is a lower interest rate. The future dilution possibility of these notes has already been baked into the share price as there was a drop in price on the day they announced, even though the market was up. Can't say I appreciated that.

    The market has obviously decided that Icahn's $17 offer is worthless (in fact, the market decided this even before MENT rejected his offer). If Icahn were serious, why wouldn't he come back with a higher bid? He himself said he was hoping that others would come in with higher bids.

    Look, Icahn talks about shareholder interests - this is code for Icahn interests. He's into MENT with 15% of the stock. He needs an exit strategy to get his money back with profit, and he isn't going to do that by selling his stock on the open market, except over a long time period. I suspect he's miscalculated on this one (again) but who knows - perhaps there is someone out there who would pay >$20 because that's what it's going to take.

  • Reply to

    MGMT. HAS TO GO.

    by baumanncynde Mar 31, 2011 3:34 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Mar 31, 2011 4:06 PM Flag

    Destroying shareholder value? How about backing that up with some data? Here's mine:
    As of today, a quick look at Yahoo charts for MENT shows:
    1 year - up 80%
    2 year - up 240%
    5 year - up 40%

    In each case, MENT has outperformed the Nasdaq by a wide margin. They have also outperformed their main competitors CDNS and SNPS.

    Doesn't look to shabby, does it? What am I missing? The only folks that could be unhappy are traders or idiots looking to make a quick buck from this Icahn/Casablanca drama.

  • edabarsteward edabarsteward Mar 31, 2011 11:57 AM Flag

    Hmmm, as of today, a quick look at Yahoo charts for MENT shows:
    1 year - up 80%
    2 year - up 240%
    5 year - up 40%

    In each case, MENT has outperformed the Nasdaq by a wide margin. They have also outperformed their main competitors CDNS and SNPS.

    Doesn't look to shabby, does it? What am I missing? The only folks that could be unhappy are traders looking to make a quick buck from this Icahn/Casablanca drama.

    Casablanca's statement today highlights performance over the period since 1993, when the current CEO took over. When the current CEO took over, MENT was in big trouble. So, hardly a meaningful or even useful comparison, no?

    I can buy that consolidation in this industry will make the industry more profitable. I don't buy that MENT should be the driver for that consolidation. Take a closer look at CDNS performance...

  • Reply to

    CDNS could be a bankrupt company

    by thownout Nov 25, 2009 1:14 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jan 13, 2010 1:12 PM Flag

    EDA is not a high growth market and hasn't been for some time. As your link points out, the EDAC numbers showed a decline over the last year, but I'd think that's a reflection of the economy. It's not a saturated market - most of EDA business is term based which means it renews, typically after a 3 year term. Of course, CDNS was caught out playing some games by mortgaging the future - hence their current predicament. Another aspect of saturation is that EDA will also be tied to the growth of electronics (not only semiconductor). So there is some growth potential.

    I do not agree that EDA revenues have been flat or declining for several years, at least not according to EDAC. There was a decline in 2008 & 2009. Of course, the 2008 decline was largely affected by the Cadence fiasco. I believe with 2009, we are back to a realistic view of revenues in EDA so I'd expect growth in 2010 (barring the economy tanking).

    Given design starts for ASICs/SOCs are declining, look for growth in ESL system level design, hw/sw. PCB will remain reliable, as will verification & custom IC.

    An industry segment does not have to be a big growth segment in order for companies to prosper. So long as it is profitable, what's wrong with value? Hence my belief that CDNS can go to 12 in a year or so. I'm not a CDNS bull or bear. I can see some upside potential but I have my doubts about the unproven leadership over there.

    BTW, I hear CDNS is laying off some folks this week - mostly in sales.

  • Reply to

    CDNS could be a bankrupt company

    by thownout Nov 25, 2009 1:14 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jan 8, 2010 6:00 PM Flag

    Edaisdead said, "I can tell you many reasons why EDA is not the sector to invest into for a long term"

    Why do you bother to post on this board? I assume you were layed off from EDA, or perhaps working for a CDNS competitor. Either way, you don't offer any solutions except, don't buy this stock! Very helpful - thanks.

    Have you looked at the SNPS balance sheet? Not too shabby.
    MENT is doing OK.
    Magma is cooked.
    CDNS - we'll have to wait and see, but I agree they could slim down and become quite a profitable company.
    ANSS - doing very nicely.

    Clearly, some opportunity for consolidation which could lead to more pricing power and profitability for the industry.

    EDA is not all about complex IC design starts. SNPS is doing very well with IP. MENT does pretty well with chip, fpga, HDL and PCB design. ANSS with analysis.

    I have dipped in and out of Cadence, short and long and done pretty well. It's not a stock I would hold for the long term but one that I understand quite well & one I would trade based on my perceived value of it.

  • Reply to

    CDNS could be a bankrupt company

    by thownout Nov 25, 2009 1:14 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jan 4, 2010 9:34 AM Flag

    edaisdead,

    As you say in your 2nd paragraph, the price of stock is related to earnings per share (and future growth of earnings per share). Earnings can improve by reducing costs and/or increasing revenues. Many companies over the last year have improved earnings solely based on reducing costs. The question in 2010 is will they be able to increase revenue in order to continue to grow earnings.

    For the sake of argument, if costs are reduced but revenue increases then every $ of increased revenue goes to earnings. Hence why I was pointing out that you don't need a 6X increase in revenue in order to see a 6X increase in stock price (and earnings). This is pretty basic stuff.

    I certainly don't see CDNS going to $30 anytime soon, but $12 within a year or so, depending on the economy - not out of the question.

  • Reply to

    CDNS could be a bankrupt company

    by thownout Nov 25, 2009 1:14 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Dec 30, 2009 10:25 AM Flag

    Just as idiotic is the statement that revenues have to rise 6 times in order to achieve a 6X increase in share price...

  • Reply to

    Bad Quarter - More Layoffs soon

    by edawizzard Jul 29, 2009 4:13 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jul 29, 2009 5:31 PM Flag

    The good news is Cadence will not lose as much money as they thought they would! Wouldn't be surprised to see a little positive action based on that.

    The bad news is...well, let's see if they are losing share to SNPS and MENT, because, if they are then the future looks problematic. My bet is on problematic.

  • Reply to

    Another Round of Layoffs

    by eda200826 Jul 14, 2009 10:54 AM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jul 21, 2009 1:12 PM Flag

    These 82 are part of the layoffs announced on 6/10 (required 60 days notice due to the CA WARN Act).

  • Reply to

    ONE2ONE REPORTING

    by eda200826 Jun 12, 2009 8:54 AM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Jun 13, 2009 4:31 PM Flag

    Why do you care what someone's title is? Just because someone has a title of manager, or director or VP (and there are several forms of VP at Cadence) doesn't mean that they are a manager of people or other managers. The problem at Cadence is they don't have good titles for senior individual contributors, so they use these director and VP titles instead. IMO, someone who is a crucial individual contributor can be a VP - all I care about as an investor is that the company gets an ROI from his/her salary.

    All this manager & title talk just seems like bitterness to me. These boards are supposed to be for folks interested in stock trading and investing. I know in this latest layoff of group directors and directors let go. I'm sure Cadence, like any other company, has a ranking system of all employees and uses that to figure out who they should let go. That the layoff mostly affects sales makes sense given the economy and reduction in forecasted revenues. I also know that significant product folks were affected as well, and that jobs have been moved over to India.

    Mr. Market certainly liked the news!

  • edabarsteward by edabarsteward Jun 10, 2009 9:49 AM Flag

    Interesting - their Q1 call implied that no more layoffs were planned.

    CFO: "Quarter end headcount was approximately 4,600. This reflects a decrease in headcount of approximately 300 from the close of Q4 '08, and a decrease of 600 from Q3 '08. The reductions announced in November are nearing completion."

    Sterling Auty - JPMorgan
    Then you mentioned the headcount at the end of the quarter and the changes what was done, but just for simplicity, what should we be thinking about as end of quarter headcount exiting the June quarter?
    Kevin Palatnik
    Exiting the June quarter, it will be around 4,576.

  • My laptop delivery has been delayed until the start of the DELL financial year. Coincidence?

    A bull would say that already made their numbers and so are delaying shipments
    A bear might say the quarter looks bad so why bother trying to make it look better and save some revenue for the next quarter

  • Reply to

    Thoughts on Earnings?

    by dmnolen4 Dec 10, 2008 11:50 AM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Dec 11, 2008 7:00 PM Flag

    Looks like the bar is set very low and 2009 is written off for now.

    Analysts are saying $50M of savings will come from another layoff of >600 people in 2009. Fine, but surely this will impact product roadmap and sales. They need to keep it together through 09 - a new CEO would help! I hope the interim office of the CEO is not getting too comfortable.

    I'd be tempted to buy but am concerned that things will deteriorate further.

  • Reply to

    Cadence going off the rails

    by edabarsteward Dec 1, 2008 1:15 PM
    edabarsteward edabarsteward Dec 3, 2008 10:34 AM Flag

    The problem is that nobody can provide a best in class complete flow. Cadence though can provide, say, 70-80% of a flow but if they want to do that then they had better be "open" to third party tools. Yes they may lose out on some point tool revenue but they'll still grab the lion's share of the customer budget.

    I know of one example where a customer will move away from Cadence because they cannot depend anymore on Cadence for the flow, combined with being very upset at having the rug pulled from under them.

  • edabarsteward by edabarsteward Dec 1, 2008 1:15 PM Flag

    Cadence boots out a bunch of companies from their Connections program according to EETimes & DeepChip, and a nice BS response from the CDNS spokeschump to go with it.

    I post this here because this is just another example of Cadence's two-faced arrogance. This spokeschump isn't a VP, but he is a symptom of what's wrong with Cadence - it's a cultural problem not just a management issue. Kicking out competitors and screwing the small companies by raising membership prices. On top of that, customers can no longer rely upon their flows working because suppliers don't have access to Cadence tools through Connections - another broken promise. CDNS just doesn't get it - they continue to tarnish their reputation and embarrass themselves.

    The lunatics are running the asylum now. Until they get a new CEO in place with a modicum of common sense, this company is heading down the toilet.

CDNS
19.36-0.13(-0.67%)Jul 2 4:00 PMEDT