A vote of confidence from Cisco Systems can be very important to fledging technology companies, especially if they have initial public offerings on the horizon.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
If you choose a market that already exists, say, networking equipment, you have to compete with an established company like Cisco. Even if your product is marginally better, Cisco can fudge it and outsell you.
I would say that in general, Cisco is a very strong research and development organization.
It's important to choose initial investors who are not twitchy and rushing for an exit. Wall Street's quarter-by-quarter lens may make the CEO make sub-optimal long-term decisions.
If you think about Cisco's offerings like TelePresence, where it's an immersive way to communicate for businesses to connect and have conversations in a real-time immersive mode, how that will change health care, how that'll change retail business, how that'll change actually travel. There's lots of changes that we will see going forward.
It's no secret that big institutional investors have a lot of advantages on Wall Street. They get the first chance to buy hot initial public offerings. They get to meet in person with companies' managements.
What I see in the corporate sector is very clearly an issue of a major shortfall in the issue of, what some people call confidence, but whatever you want to call it. Clearly people are looking out in the very distant future and they are saying that it is too complex.
What we believe is going to be very important is the delivery of traditional software and services and hardware over the Net. That's a form of electronic marketplace.
A hardware startup with a lot of funding and a lot of momentum has a lot less risk.
It is customers that decide if we succeed.
If you are worried about the risk to your reputation, you don't launch a telecoms firm in an aggressive way.
No opposing quotes found.