cmm1@CUNIXA.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/21/90)
OK, I have finally dug up the reports on Atari's financial condition (which isn't too good). I have reviewed the agreement between my company and the source of the report and I don't feel comfortable about posting it to the net. (Getting sued would really bum my ride.) So all who are interested (within reason) send me an email request and I'll send you the highlights of the report. thank you for you patience. For all those who have been doubtful about the decline of Atari's finances, just take al look at their current ($6) stock price. If I am not mistaken, Atari was selling at an all time low of 4.5 right after the Black Monday crash. About 6 months ago (I beleive) it was selling as high as $11-12. Now the stock market is at an all-time high and Atari's stock is sitting near the basement again. Everyone on Wall St. knows that Atari is in financial trouble and consequently the stock has lost most of its recent value. Even the release of the much-touted TT will really not help too much, as it will take some time to gear up production and a 16mhz 68030 machine is really not much of a splash (compared to what it would have been a year ago) and will not generate and incredible amount of interest in Atari (except for the loyal userbase it already has (most of whom cannot afford a $3K machine anyway)). Face it, Atari is lounging around on its haunches TRYING to release a 16 mhz 68030 machine while most other manufacturers have had one out for some time now and have subsequently released 25mhz and 40mhz machines. Where does this leave Atari? In trouble...big trouble. They are making money in other eareas, but in computers expect them to take some hefty losses in the next 1-2.5 years. As ever, this is my own humble opinion. Your mileage may vary. Chris ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more? ------------------------------+---------------------------
saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) (03/22/90)
Chris Mauritz has been saying scary things about Atari finances lately. I just
wanted to make a few fairly obvious, but calming, observations. First: we
almost lost Atari in the Federated mess. I suspect that the accounting by
which there was still something left after the bills for that one were paid
wouldn't stand close examination. The natural consequence of massively
overstating the worth of a company at a particular time, is that the company
won't seem to be doing very well in adjacent time periods. So Atari doesn't
seem to be doing as well now as a fair count would show, because they borrowed
from the future last year. Chris observes that the TT won't be a money maker
early on. I wonder what that has to do with anything (except perhaps the
urgency with which it gets shoved out the door). Near as I can make out, the
possible bill-paying products for Atari this year are the Portfolio and the
Lynx (I know, they aren't STs. The likely ST money maker is the 520,
which the way I read things is about to become the first pleasant-to use
home computer in the US below $700 ->In The Configuration Used<-. STacy may
make a bit of money this year, but in the short run it's a PR item. The
TT is business for the future. The Mega line looks like the developer/academic
special, especially if E graphics and sound catch on. The ATW and ABC don't
appear to apply to the US market at all, although I understand that profits
from ABC are very welcome.
Bottom line: if Atari was going to fold soon, they would have done it
already. But don't put the pension fund into Atari stock.
Steve J.cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/22/90)
[Steve Jacobs' posting about Atari's health deleted] Whoa! I didn't say that Atari was going to close up shop tomorrow. What I mean is that they are going to be losing money for a while in the computer area of their business. Their R&D is just too far behind the competition. re: Portfolio I have heard from a friend who works at J&R Music World (they carry and sell a lot of Portfolios) that they are having a LOT of returned defective machines. Besides, who would buy one of the things for $400 when you can pay another $100 and get a very usable Toshiba laptop with standard size floppies, more memory and the availability of DOS versions above 2.1? Granted, the machine is small and cutesy and you can pop it in your briefcase, but it is rather fragile, expensive and difficult to type on. If it was $250 instead of $400 it could compete with the Sharp Wizard as a nifty little mini-electronic notebook, but it is too expensive and breakable for that. Honestly, what are those marketing guys thinking? re: STacy Now here is the sleeper of the year. If Atari can get these babies out the door and improve the battery life, they will have a winner. Hehe, it is funny to note that most of them will be used to emulate Macs. re: ATW What ever happened to this machine? It has been in developer hands for ages now and nobody seems to have written anything of consequense for it and you still can't buy one. re: Megas IMHO, this machine is going to die a slow painful death. It is impossible to develop anything for the critter as there are more board revisions out there than there are people named Jones. Just ask Avant Garde how much of a headache it is to prepare for this. I have seen 5 or 6 STs opened in my life and they all had different mother boards...tsk tsk... That is a no no if you want people to spend THEIR hard earned money to develop a product for your machine. re: 520 ST taking over the "cheap computer" market I don't think so. The Amiga 500 is about the same in price and is better suited to play games (which most people will do with a $300 computer anyway). Also, the Amiga is MUCH easier to upgrade if the user desires more power in the future. The poor 520st user has to throw his machine away and buy a better machine or pay someone to do a hardware hack (like an accelerator board). How many average home users will want this kind of hassle when they can just plug in new RAM and other goodies into an Amy. Also, Commodore is doing a MUCH better job at advertizing. Wow, this letter seems a bit harsh, but I don't think I've said anything that is grossly inacurate. If I have, please correct me. Atari's computers are going to be in the bottoms of America's closets if the company doesn't shape up. This would be awful. Send letters to the brothers Tramiel and bitch. I did! When that didn't work, I bought another brand. C'est la vie... Chris ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more? ------------------------------+---------------------------
gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (03/23/90)
In article <1990Mar22.071155.5496@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: [ A long time ago, Chris posted that Atari was "highly leveraged". I asked him to look this up to see if it was true. He never posted whether it was or not. Could someone please check this? ] >[Steve Jacobs' posting about Atari's health deleted] > >Whoa! I didn't say that Atari was going to close up shop tomorrow. What >I mean is that they are going to be losing money for a while in the computer >area of their business. Their R&D is just too far behind the competition. Atari made money in the computer area of their business in the 4th quarter of 1989. Giving that revenues and profits lagged for 3 quarters and now new products are shipping in a quarter in which revenues and profit rose, it seems clear that Atari is entering a new product cycle. The figures don't support your assertions. >re: Portfolio [ criticism of Portfolio deleted ] If you think the Portfolio is so ill-positioned, you must think people are really stupid to pay $2000 for a Poquet portable. After all, it has no more features than one of those Toshiba things, but it lacks a floppy drive. The market, not the pundits, will determine the Portfolio's success. Thus far Atari has sold a bunch of them. Of course, they have to get their defect rate down, and they will have to discount the price from its current level. >re: ATW > >What ever happened to this machine? It has been in developer hands for >ages now and nobody seems to have written anything of consequense for >it and you still can't buy one. There have been several postings from people in England who have bought production models. It seems that it is being marketed as a niche product in England, which is much more interested in the Transputer than the US. >re: Megas > >IMHO, this machine is going to die a slow painful death. It is impossible >to develop anything for the critter as there are more board revisions >out there than there are people named Jones. Joe Average User doesn't buy hardware upgrades for his motherboard, other than memory. Personally, I'd rather buy an STe if I could choose any ST model just because it's so cheap to plug in SIMMs. >re: 520 ST taking over the "cheap computer" market > >I don't think so. The Amiga 500 is about the same in price and is better >suited to play games (which most people will do with a $300 computer anyway). Compare the STe to the Amiga 500. Given that all STes have SIMM slots, it's easier and cheaper to upgrade STe memory than Amiga 500 memory. Each entry-level system has its strengths and weaknesses, and I doubt either one is going to eliminate the other. >Wow, this letter seems a bit harsh, but I don't think I've said anything >that is grossly inacurate. Well, your claim that Atari is "highly leveraged" was never confirmed, and you seem to think that Atari is losing money when they're making money. You also might consider that they are at the beginning of a new product cycle. If revenues remain at about 450 million $, and profit rise to a mere 10% (they've done better in the past) , then the stock at its current price will end up around 10:1 P/E. It's probable that revenues will actually rise 20% or more in the next year. I'm very surprised that they earned anything in 4Q89 despite making big investments in new product production. Obviously Atari is not a safe investment. But, IMHO, it is not a bad investment at the current stock price. > Atari's > computers are going to be in the bottoms of America's closets if > the company doesn't shape up. Revenues are rising also. Have a nice day, and please post some *facts* about Atari's long-term debt. Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I gave my lunch for space-sickness research.
cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/23/90)
Your posting was rather annoying, as I TOLD you that I was going to send you the complete financial report when I got it into computer-readable form (which I have just completed today). For your information, the company's debt/financial worth ratio is roughly 3 to 1. I would call that HIGHLY leveraged wouldn't you? Not only that, but they have been consistently delaying payments to their suppliers (not a good sign) and have been REFUSED credit in the recent past because of it. They are MUCH less liquid than most companies in their industry and they have a very sluggish turnover in inventory. Also, it doesn't help matters that their main trade facility is denominated in Yen (I believe it was for ~US$13,500,000) and thus will buy less in every market ecxept in Japan as the Yen depreciates. I'm a bit tired so I'll save the rest of reality for later. I wasn't trying to delay this information and I resent your implications that I was somehow lying. The facts speak for themselves, Greg. Wake up and smell the coffee. Have a nice day. Chris ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more? ------------------------------+---------------------------
mitsolid@acf5.NYU.EDU (Thanasis Mitsolides) (03/23/90)
/* acf5:comp.sys.atari.st / gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) > I'm very > surprised that they earned anything in 4Q89 despite making big > investments in new product production. Yes that must be the (agreably) complex process of designing a computer working at 16 (sixteen!) MHz which even (yes even that...) includes SIMM slots! But most impressive of all: The screen resolution. It will actually support the screen resolution used in IBM-PC compatibles the last two years. A full 640x480 at 16 colors!!!!!! But wait. This amazing system will include ONE EXPANSION SLOT. Consider: Even a cheap PC-compatible (introduced LESS than 6 years ago) rarely has more that 5 expansion slots!!!!!!! As if the specifications alone were not enough to bogle one's mind, it has been said that the system may reach mass production less than a year after its official introduction. And yes, the official introduction is expected before this comming Christmas! There is more. Unix, whose full blown implementations only resently (2 years ago) appeared in the PC world is currently under development. U Thanasis
cosc10hv@elroy.uh.edu (Paul Sears) (03/24/90)
In article <1990Mar21.215753.8966@chinet.chi.il.us>, saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) writes: > The Mega line looks like the developer/academic > special, especially if E graphics and sound catch on. The ATW and ABC don't > appear to apply to the US market at all, although I understand that profits > from ABC are very welcome. > Steve J. One question, what is the ATW and the ABC - I have (honestly) never heard of those before... -- -------------------------------------------- | Paul Sears University of Houston | | "ThunderCat" --------------------- | | COSC10HV@Elroy.Uh.Edu | | 129.7.1.2 or TECHJW@Elroy.Uh.Edu | |__________________________________________| 'the greater an individual's power over others, the greater the evil that might possibly originate with him' - PROPAGANDA, off the CD, A SECRET WISH
mitsolid@acf5.NYU.EDU (Thanasis Mitsolides) (03/24/90)
/* acf5:comp.sys.atari.st / gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) > I'm very > surprised that they earned anything in 4Q89 despite making big > investments in new product production. Yes that must be the (agreably) complex process of designing a computer working at 16 (sixteen!) MHz which even (yes even that...) includes SIMM slots! But most impressive of all: The screen resolution. It will actually support the screen resolution used in IBM-PC compatibles the last two years. A full 640x480 at 16 colors!!!!!! But wait. This amazing system will include ONE EXPANSION SLOT. Consider: Even a PC-compatible (introduced LESS than 6 years ago) rarely has more that 5 expansion slots!!!!!!! As if the specifications alone were not enough to bogle one's mind, it has been said that the system may reach mass production less than a year after its official introduction. And yes, the official introduction is expected before this comming Christmas! There is more. Unix, whose full blown implementations only resently (2 years ago) appeared in the PC world is currently under development. Man, am I impressed. I can sleep from the excitement. Thanasis
perand@nada.kth.se (Per Andersson) (03/25/90)
In article <5780001@acf5.NYU.EDU> mitsolid@acf5.NYU.EDU (Thanasis Mitsolides) writes: >Yes that must be the (agreably) complex process >of designing a computer working at 16 (sixteen!) MHz >[ lots more] Why shouldn't it be complex and expensive to construct a new computer ? And why should it help that IBM constructed a brain-dead computer based on a brain-dead chip in '81. Atari didn't base this construction on this and therefor your flame on Atari seems out of place. You can buy a PC instead of flaming Atari for making machines adressing more than 1 meg of memory. Not sure what your comment was indicating, really ? Per -- --- Per Andersson Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden perand@admin.kth.se, @nada.kth.se
cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/25/90)
In article <3204@draken.nada.kth.se> perand@nada.kth.se (Per Andersson) writes: >In article <5780001@acf5.NYU.EDU> mitsolid@acf5.NYU.EDU (Thanasis Mitsolides) writes: >>Yes that must be the (agreably) complex process >>of designing a computer working at 16 (sixteen!) MHz >>[ lots more] > >Why shouldn't it be complex and expensive to construct a new computer ? >And why should it help that IBM constructed a brain-dead computer based >on a brain-dead chip in '81. Atari didn't base this construction on this >and therefor your flame on Atari seems out of place. You can buy a PC >instead of flaming Atari for making machines adressing more than 1 meg >of memory. Not sure what your comment was indicating, really ? > >Per >-- >--- >Per Andersson >Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden >perand@admin.kth.se, @nada.kth.se Give me a break. I think that Atari (correct me if I'm wrong) is WAY behind the competition as far as R&D is concerned. They are going down. You heard it here first. They cannot afford the R&D cash to keep up with current technology. They didn't even invent the Portfolio or the ATW, they licensed the technology from the inventors. Where is all that R&D cash going??? Is it going to the improvement in TOS (giggle...heee heee ho ho ho)? Atari's operating costs are increasing at an alarming rate, yet they are not producing anything new. (Do I hear violins playing??) Chris ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more? ------------------------------+---------------------------
Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com (03/25/90)
Interesting stuff... Just a couple of comments... Atari *can't* improve the battery life in the STACEY, so they'd decided to DROP battery power altogether. The computer will be a "transportable" versi of the ST, but you'll need an AC power outlet nearby to use it. A third-party developer is working on a "gel-cell" battery for the STACEY, bu it's going to be a LARGE unit that you'll snap your STACEY into, and it will cost several hundred dollars. The MEGA line may or may not have "E" style graphics and sound... Atari only informally asked developers how they'd feel about a MEGA with STe style features. IF Atari did decide to produce such a unit, it likely wouldn't hit the market for several years (based on past performance). The Portfolio may be selling well (by whose standards?) to people who have a lot of money to spend on toys of limited usefulness, but I'd like to see some sales-figures comparisons between the Portfolio and truly useful mini-sized MS-DOS compatibles like the Toshiba line. The 520ST already *had* its opportunity to "take over the cheap computer market", FIVE YEARS ago, and Atari blew its technological lead. Now, I see people buying $299 IBM PC clones from Radio Shack. It doesn't matter that the ST is technologically superior, if the buying public has never heard of them. As for the comment that "it seems clear that Atari is entering a new product cycle"... Atari is *ALWAYS* entering a "new product cycle".. Real Soon Now, Second Quarter, by the End of the Year... perhaps Wall Street has caught onto Atari's "Boy who cried Wolf" tactics..? BobR
gl8f@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (03/26/90)
In article <28271@cup.portal.com> Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes: >The Portfolio may be selling well (by whose standards?) to people who have >a lot of money to spend on toys of limited usefulness, but I'd like to see >some sales-figures comparisons between the Portfolio and truly useful >mini-sized MS-DOS compatibles like the Toshiba line. You might note that Radio Shack just released a $400 "palm-top" machine which is much more limited than the Portfolio. It seems that several companies think that there's a market here, and Atari has the nicest package. Also, the only MS-DOS compatible that's as small as the Portfolio is the Poquet, which is $2000. The Toshiba is a pig next to either of them. The Atari (and Radio Shack) gamble is that there is a market among people who don't want to lug around some huge laptop. Damn, those Poquets are nice, too. It seems that lots of people have a lot of money to spend on that toy, when they could spend 1/3 as much to get the same thing, only heavier and with a better keyboard and a real floppy drive. >As for the comment that "it seems clear that Atari is entering a new >product cycle"... Atari is *ALWAYS* entering a "new product cycle".. >Real Soon Now, Second Quarter, by the End of the Year... perhaps >Wall Street has caught onto Atari's "Boy who cried Wolf" tactics..? Yes, but this time they delivered new products (STe, Lynx, Portfolio) and revenues and income are rising instead of falling. A new product cycle isn't something a company announces, it's something you can see in the financial figures. And the financial figures say that revenues are up. Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I gave my lunch for space-sickness research.
rick@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Eric Ruck) (03/26/90)
I think the talk of financial health isn't all it's cracked up to be, nor is the talk of what or won't Atari do in the future, as per announced. I think a wait and see attitude is about the only reasonable stance. No, I won't rush out and buy Atari stock (unless maybe it hits <$5 before the TT is out-- easy come, easy go) but I'm don't hear the violins yet either. I think it is interesting that the machine Atari introduced soemthing like five years ago is still somewhat competitive even though it is virtually unchanged. If they do get the legendary TT out I assume that even if it isn't the most technologically staggering display of price per power, it will have the same flexibility as the old platform, and the people who see its potential, however few they may be, will support it until the next computer revolution. I know for a fact that people are getting tired of paying premium dollars for overpriced toys. Although the Macintosh is popular among college students, the once enthused professors are getting tired of shelling out the kind of money that Apple is asking for for technology that is impressive but for most people meaningless. Granted, they're not rushing to Atari or Commodore, but these machines may get their day. Eric Ruck Incidentally, even though I'm hardly overwhelmed by Atari's performance, at this time I would still buy another Mega 2, or recommend a first Mega 2 to fellow college students. I am pleased with the whole system for my modest needs, as the mouse is nice, keyboard feel excellent, and the software (WordPerfect and Uniterm) just what the doctor ordered. And it saves me a few dollars over the other machines.
david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) (03/26/90)
I don't know why we're all so worried about the future of Atari. Right now, my ST lets me do some decent DTP, read e-mail, word process, and (using MT-CShell) gives me an incredibly cheap platform for developing Unix-like software at home instead of spending too much time sitting in front of an orange monitor under florescent lights. Sure, it's out of date -- so are the Mac, Amiga, and anything which runs MS DOS (I include Windows and MSDOS's messy follower, OS2). There's a new generation on the horizon, which will be so much larger and faster than any home computers that we won't know how we ever got along with only a few lousy megabytes and speeds under 50mhz. We'll have multi-gigabyte HDs and machines running really nice graphic interfaces on top of a (usually invisible) Unix, all for a little more than the price of an ST today. But it is still today. I've used (and programmed for) MSDOS, and it's a real pain. I like Unix, but I miss GEM, which is very easy to program. I'm ready to dump my mega 2 as soon as I can afford something better, but I'm not ready to whine about it in the mean time. Sure it's cheap. Sure Atari has no future, but neither do car manufacturers. Let's worry about these things tomorrow. David Megginson, Centre for Medieval Studies BITNET: meggin@vm.epas.utoronto.ca --- * Via ProDoor 3.1R
gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (03/26/90)
At the risk of boring everyone... In article <1990Mar23.010055.12116@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: > >Your posting was rather annoying, as I TOLD you that I was going to send you >the complete financial report when I got it into computer-readable form >(which I have just completed today). Apologies. Chris has been very helpful, giving me some interesting facts in email. > For your information, the company's >debt/financial worth ratio is roughly 3 to 1. I would call that HIGHLY >leveraged wouldn't you? A companies worth can be estimated in several ways. Atari has roughly US$175 million in debt, US$450 million in sales, and a naieve calculation gives a US$300 million value on the stock market. Yes, the "financial worth" of the company says that it's leveraged. But other analysies of the worth of the company says it isn't very leveraged. What's important is this: even if they kept on performaning poorly, they have enough cash to make interest payments for several years. So they're in no immediate danger of going bankrupt. >Not only that, but they have been consistently delaying payments to >their suppliers (not a good sign) and have been REFUSED credit in the >recent past because of it. This is true. But this is the way Atari has always been, and their payment record has not gotten much worse recently. They behaved this way back when they had two hundred million in the bank... so this is not something that is getting worse and indicates impending doom. I do not know what their current cash flow looks like. But they made an operating profit in the 4th quarter of 1989, so you would expect that the cash flow situation is getting better. > They are MUCH less liquid than most companies >in their industry and they have a very sluggish turnover in inventory. This is true, and this is not good. Also, Chris pointed out in email that Atari's debt rating from Moody's is a B3 - not good. But this was recently re-evaluated and stayed the same. Again, not getting worse. The fundamental source of the disagreement with Chris and I seems to be Atari's new products. He does not believe they will succeed in the market. I believe they are showing signs that they are already succeeding, given that Atari's revenues were up in the 4th quarter of 1989, the first quarter that the Lynx, Portfolio, and the STe (in Europe) were available. This good news comes after 3 down quarters. I have not seen a breakdown of revenue to see if, for example, ST sales were down... what I've heard suggests that Atari video game revenues were definately dropping. Atari is definately not going bankrupt soon. Whether or not the stock is a good investment at $6 is an open question. Cheers! Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I gave my lunch for space-sickness research.
cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/26/90)
In article <1990Mar25.184244.7530@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes: > >>As for the comment that "it seems clear that Atari is entering a new >>product cycle"... Atari is *ALWAYS* entering a "new product cycle".. >>Real Soon Now, Second Quarter, by the End of the Year... perhaps >>Wall Street has caught onto Atari's "Boy who cried Wolf" tactics..? > >Yes, but this time they delivered new products (STe, Lynx, Portfolio) >and revenues and income are rising instead of falling. A new product >cycle isn't something a company announces, it's something you can see >in the financial figures. And the financial figures say that revenues >are up. Greg, I must take issue with your interpretation of the facts and figures. The sales trend for Atari Corp is DOWN. Their "increase" in revenue does not exist. Sure, their revenue did increase last quarter to $4 million from an $84 million loss. C'mon, I know you're a big ST fan, but your standing up for Atari Corp's finances like this is a bit foolish. Meanwhile, their backoffice expenses are rising alot more quickly than their "profits." I am not senselessly flaming this company, but the numbers tell a much different story than you suggest. BTW, keep your eyes out for Moodys to downgrade Atari's $75 million europaper from B3 to ???.... > >Greg Lindahl >gl8f@virginia.edu I gave my lunch for space-sickness research. ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Air Warrior is king! ------------------------------+---------------------------
gl8f@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (03/26/90)
In article <1990Mar26.044419.11661@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: >Greg, I must take issue with your interpretation of the facts and figures. Feel free, but be careful of your facts. >The sales trend for Atari Corp is DOWN. SALES for the first three quarters of fiscal year 89 are DOWN. Sales for the last quarter, the Christmas season, were UP over 4Q88. Yearly sales were down as a whole. Sales for the 4th quarter were up, right when the new produts were delivered. Ergo, Atari's new products are selling. Now, you can choose to quote the yearly figure, DOWN, or you can quote the 4th quarter figure, UP. But please avoid insulting the intelligence of the readers here and tell them which figure you're talking about. > Their "increase" in revenue >does not exist. Sure, their revenue did increase last quarter to >$4 million from an $84 million loss. WRONG. They showed a $4 million operating _profit_ in the 4th quarter. Profit, not revenue. The $84 million dollars lost last year was due to a $100 million dollar write-off for Federated on top of $16 million of operating profit. In short, operating _profit_ for Atari Corp, excluding Federated, was down. But 4th quarter _revenues_ for Atari Corp were up. Of course, they need to fix the expense side of the business to make their normal margins. > C'mon, I know you're a big ST >fan, but your standing up for Atari Corp's finances like this is a >bit foolish. Well, at least I can read financial reports and not totally goof up when it comes time to post. And I make an attempt to specify what I'm talknig about when it comes to trends: quarters, or yearly figures. > Meanwhile, their backoffice expenses are rising alot >more quickly than their "profits." No wonder they fired 15% of the staff. They are watching costs. This is something that Uncle Jack is pretty good at. If you're going to make claims about revenues and profits, please quote the correct numbers. In order to understand Atari's numbers, you have to watch Federated and make sure you're looking only at the Atari Corp numbers, which is their current business operation. And you need to make sure you aren't getting profits and revenues mixed up. And you need to make sure, when you're wondering if NEW products are selling well, that you are looking the right quarter's results. Have a nice day. Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I gave my lunch for space-sickness research.
saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) (03/26/90)
Chris very nearly admitted I was right a couple days ago that if Atari was
going to fold any time soon it would have done it already. Now he says
the're going down. Just because they aren't what he wants them to be, he
predicts doom.
Again, it is perfectly obvious that with no expectations of any new products
and no payoff from R&D, Atari is good for a couple more years. They may
even have a VERY good year this year collecting their couple bucks a copy
on LYNX and Portfolio. If STacy comes out soon it should at least break
even this year. If the TT comes out by mid-Summer, Atari should survive at
least 5 more years selling those.
Chris, are you working on Wall Street? I got a couple of market letters
that predict a crash, with lots of financial services company new hires
losing their jobs.
Steve J.cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/26/90)
In article <1990Mar26.071218.10123@chinet.chi.il.us> saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) writes: >Chris very nearly admitted I was right a couple days ago that if Atari was >going to fold any time soon it would have done it already. Now he says >the're going down. Just because they aren't what he wants them to be, he >predicts doom. Exactly what doom are you referring to? I don't think I ever said Atari was in danger of going bankrupt, but they are in danger of continuing to lose money. >Again, it is perfectly obvious that with no expectations of any new products >and no payoff from R&D, Atari is good for a couple more years. They may >even have a VERY good year this year collecting their couple bucks a copy >on LYNX and Portfolio. If STacy comes out soon it should at least break >even this year. If the TT comes out by mid-Summer, Atari should survive at >least 5 more years selling those. Well, as Greg pointed out, that is where I disagree with you (and him). I think these products are a bit too weak to pull Atari out of the hole. IMHO, they need to come up with something a little more interesting to keep current ST owners in the stable and to attract new owners. >Chris, are you working on Wall Street? I got a couple of market letters >that predict a crash, with lots of financial services company new hires >losing their jobs. Yes, I am working on Wall Street. I am an analyst for a large Japanese bank (about 2 times a large as Citibank, US's largest bank) so I have no fears about my job security at all. I'll email more financials as they become available to me. > Steve J. ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null |Air Warrior is king! ------------------------------+---------------------------
jdg@elmgate.UUCP (Jeff Gortatowsky CUST) (03/27/90)
In article <1990Mar26.071218.10123@chinet.chi.il.us> saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) writes: >Chris very nearly admitted I was right a couple days ago that if Atari was >going to fold any time soon it would have done it already. Now he says >the're going down. Just because they aren't what he wants them to be, he >predicts doom. > Two Cents. I too beleive atari (at least US) to be in deep. In fact, I'm not so sure that the whole last 5 years of Nill' support is simply because atari could care less about the US market. Figuring, it's a PC land (as it is), and why waste valuable money trying to gain entry. But, if some poor soul wishes to buy a machine, fine. But dont expect much. Maybe a tax-writeoff. The Lynx, is another story. According to two pals a mine, whom bought Amiga's to develop for the Lynx, they cant even get the developer package. Could it be that atari has no license to this? If atari were, intererested in making money here, why, preytel, did they create a Lynx commercial that easily turns off any american parent? If they want to make money, see the Lynx to Sega say (if they want it). And it'll go big. I find it VERY hard to beleive that Atari's poor marketing in the past 5 years in the US is simply an accident. They just keep danglin' a carrot in front of our noses for a "just in case" market. Just in case what? I dunno. Maybe UK sales dropping. It cannot be a simple set of mistakes. AS to atari US future. They have none w/ me. They are (in my opinion) a HIGHLY non-credible company, that could care less about me, the end purchaser. And, to use an analogy, Would you buy a car from this man? Knowing that once you've bought it, he could care less about service/ support. Not I. And, I've heard it for some 5 years. Promises here. Excuses there. While I like the ST, I cannot justify the purchase of the (still vapor) TT. You may pay more for apples, but, at least you know they are there for you. And w/ IBM, they happen to be very very good w/ support. And even if they were'nt I could rcv all the support I'd ever need elsewhere.ZO}_ In addition, I think I'd be real hard pressed to find 100 competent Atari developers around. I helped write Deskcart, which, was touted as the best add on product for the ST at one time. Even fickle Jerry Pournelle liked it. I made 12K bucks... (Thats stretchin it). Thats SAD, REAL REAL SAD. Alienating people such as I, Dave Beckmeyer, and others dooms atari. They were/are all kissy face again. But, "Fool me once, your the fool" "Fool me twice, I am". IF! the ATARI COMMUNITY, would stand up and SAY WE HAVE HAD IT!. And mean it. you might see a turn around. Bankrupting Epyx really upset me. Atari has no right to do that. Especially considering that Epyx produced fine software, for many machine types, and was around before atari entered the computer arena. ANY company that claims to be a good organization, yet blatently bankrupts others has no place at all in this country. So, Atari, since you support the UK so readily, why dont you just pack up & go there, and let the rest of us get what we pay for from a credible organiztion. Flames to dev\null. -- Jeff Gortatowsky-Eastman Kodak Company .....sun!sunrock!kodak!elmgate!jdg (716)-726-0084 Eastman Kodak makes film not comments. Therefore these comments are mine not theirs.
bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Bob Bright) (03/28/90)
In article <1238@elmgate.UUCP> rg@aurora.UUCP writes: > > [blah blah in deep blah no support blah blah Atari Corp. hates > Americans blah blah didn't make no money blah blah HAD IT! blah blah > blah don't get no respect blah blah ...] [Was this supposed to be an early April Fool's post, or what?!] >-- >Jeff Gortatowsky-Eastman Kodak Company .....sun!sunrock!kodak!elmgate!jdg >(716)-726-0084 >Eastman Kodak makes film not comments. Therefore these comments are mine >not theirs. In light of the recent interest in posting a monthly "Intro. to Comp.sys.atari.st", I suggest that we also post the following on a monthly basis, under the title "GENERIC COMP.SYS.ATARI.ST WHINE". (This is copped from a message sent to me recently by one "mathew" <smm12@cl.cam.ac.uk>. It's remarkably similar in style and content to Jeff's post, but I think it's preferable for monthly posting, since it covers a few more bases. For the sake of thoroughness we should probably add a few whines concerning Atari's financial health. Oh yes, and if any other developers or ex-developers have more personal testimonials concerning how little money their products have made, that would be helpful too; a little something for everyone. Just think how much needless typing and banging on the 'n' key and editing of kill files we could save, not to mention wasted bandwidth, if we could all just get it off our chest once a month in the form of a Generic Whine post!! Here's a start:) "I've not had time to wade through comp.sys.atari.st recently... I get fed up with all the people moaning - they go on and on about how Sam Tramiel should be running the country and how Atari don't make good enough manuals and they don't give their dealers proper support and why isn't the blitter available yet and they ask why can't I get TOS 1.4 from my dealer and then wonder why nobody answers and isn't it terrible that they don't advertise in magazines enough and complaining about the keyboard "it's so tacky..." and if the Europeans can buy an STe why can't they I mean it's not as if there were any difficulties in getting them to Canada, not that I want to buy one of course I just want to see one so that I can complain that Super ZapNarg III doesn't run on it and anyway the blitter's no good because it doesn't have a draw-tartan-circle routine like the Amiga does and they told me I'd be able to upgrade my ST with a Cray emulator for two dollars on a plug-in card and the Mega ST 2 has been discontinued so now I'll have to throw it away and buy a new 2MB ST in a different box and of course the TT/P is vapourware I mean okay so people have seen it working in England so what they're probably lying to us just to get us to buy Atari gear and did you see the new Nintendo GameBoy cartridge nowhere near as good as the Lynx but of course you can't buy them because Atari messed up the distribution like they did with the ST and I'm going to have to go to Europe to get a mono monitor and stop off at a pub for a pint of Watneys Red Barrel and (continued in Monty Python's "Travel Agent" sketch)..." That pretty much sums up the state of the art in c.s.a.s. whining, I think. Suggested revisions? BBB -- Bob Bright <bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca> Dept. of Philosophy University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Man R3T 2N2 (204) 474-9680
aaron@pencarrow.comp.vuw.ac.nz (Aaron Roydhouse) (03/29/90)
In article <1990Mar27.191012.10607@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Bob Bright) writes: > > In light of the recent interest in posting a monthly "Intro. to > Comp.sys.atari.st", I suggest that we also post the following on a > monthly basis, under the title "GENERIC COMP.SYS.ATARI.ST WHINE". Do you think .st posters are just the sort of people who whine too much, or are you prepared to consider the ever so vague possibility they have something(s) to complain about? > [stuff deleted]... and how Atari don't make good > enough manuals and they don't give their dealers proper support and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You think you have problems, here in NZ we have to make out own support. The NZ distributors make an good effort but you get the feeling they're keep fairly much in the dark. > [stuff deleted]... and if the Europeans can buy an > STe why can't they I mean it's not as if there were any difficulties > in getting them to Canada, ...[foo] Well, we can get them here, not particularly cheap though, in case anyone is interested here are the full retail prices: 0.5Mb STe NZ$1299 Estimated US value: US$647 1.0Mb STe NZ$1599 (Excluding NZ Sales Tax) US$796 2.0Mb STe NZ$1999 US$995 4.0Mb STe NZ$2999 US$1493 Note: These prices include a local (to NZ) sales tax (called Goods & Services Tax or GST here) of 12.5%. Any remaining ST's (there aren't many) are selling for NZ$999 inc GST (520STfm), about US$497 I guess. I would like to know what prices are like elsewhere, probably a constructive exercise - if we don't whine to much about the differences. So if you're reading this and you're not from NZ (a distinct possibility) then tell us what you local retail prices are - this means full recommended retail, not street value. If you're in the US, I guess you should mention which state the prices refer to, and possibly local tax conditions. I'll summarise and post any email I get on the subject. I guess any Atari computer products are valid data, ST's, STe's, Lynx, Mega's, TT's (:-) but remember rrp, not back-of-truck discount price. > [stuff deleted]... and did you see the new Nintendo GameBoy cartridge nowhere > near as good as the Lynx but of course you can't buy them because... Well, apparently they will be selling NZ wide (NZ's not that wide you know :-) as of next week (source: this is what Atari dealers have been told). I'm told only four games will be available and I have not heard any indication of what the prices will be. > Bob Bright <bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca> > Dept. of Philosophy > University of Manitoba > Winnipeg, Man R3T 2N2 (204) 474-9680 _________________________________________________________________________ / \ The Entity | Phone: +64 4 850 988 Fax: +64 4 710 187 |@/ Aaron Roydhouse | SMail: PO Box 11-704, Wellington, New Zealand \__ aaron@comp.vuw.ac.nz | Quote: "Death - To stop sinning suddenly"