Comments on Tech Phoenix's articles RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/author/tech-phoenix/articles http://seekingalpha.com/article/132388-at-t-needs-to-extend-the-iphone-deal?source=feed#comment-473722 473722 Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:40:06 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/132388-at-t-needs-to-extend-the-iphone-deal?source=feed#comment-473359 473359 Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:08:49 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/132388-at-t-needs-to-extend-the-iphone-deal?source=feed#comment-473350 473350 The text messaging boom is just another indicator that the US economy > is still fundamentally strong. Same for the huge sales of I phones. > So much for recession.]]> Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:01:48 -0400

On Apr 22 03:59 PM Cetin Hakimoglu wrote:

> The text messaging boom is just another indicator that the US economy
> is still fundamentally strong. Same for the huge sales of I phones.
> So much for recession.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76761-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-ii?source=feed#comment-172681 172681 Fri, 23 May 2008 12:03:54 -0400
Not many people can say that.

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76761-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-ii?source=feed#comment-166348 166348 Mon, 12 May 2008 13:34:10 -0400
Most importantly, i2's maintenance revenue has shown a 5% growth y/y in q1-2008, 1st time in 10 years.

When a software company turned-around, maintenance revenue growth is the last thing to happen.

i2 has reported 12 consective quarters of profit and has been growing record bookings for the last 2 quarters. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76761-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-ii?source=feed#comment-166344 166344 Mon, 12 May 2008 13:24:09 -0400
i2's stock is still in the bottom of a trash bin just don't know when will it start to surge? maybe until enough people know the story.

The buy-out price (if it happens) could have very little to do with today's trading price. Hedge funds know the valuation and are demanding the company to do something to increase shareholders's value.

One particular hedge fund named "AMALGAMATED GADGET LP" aka Q investment based in Fort Worth who holds i2's 2.5% prefer stock has been crying out loud to sell the company at any price. Why? because as long as i2 has a "change in control", Q will be entitled to a 110% payback of its holding of prefer stock, NO MATTER WHAT PRICE I2 IS SOLD FOR, and that's part of the deal of the prefer stock.

Many other hedge funds and i2 shareholders have realized that what's good for Q is not necessarily good for every shareholder.

"AMALGAMATED GADGET LP" aka "Q investment" is said to be run by Geoffrey P. Raynor, a Texas multi-millionaire.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76761-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-ii?source=feed#comment-166313 166313 Mon, 12 May 2008 12:55:20 -0400
My point here, is that profit margin at i2 HAS been low. Going forward, one hopes it to be much higher. TIME will tell.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73288-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-i?source=feed#comment-159809 159809 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:42:45 -0400
Today is the date i2 and SAP went to court, i2 is suing SAP for infringing 7 of its SCM patends involving about 300 cases/deals.

Can you believe that the Markman hearing is over?

Although we don't know how it went now but we know i2 was well prepared and dead serious about winning this case for several reasons.

1. SAP used the partnership to steal the patented technologies from i2.

2. SAP hired i2 employees who were familiar with the technologies to develop products with similiar capability to compete with i2.

3. SAP bad-mouthed i2 to scare potential customers from buying i2 products products by spreading rumors that i2 will be going out of business.

If wins the case, i2 intends to seek the maximum damage to SAP including court injunction to prohibit SAP from selling its products and servicing its customers together with maximum monetary damage.

i2 do not intend to license its technologies to SAP.

SAP had better be praying hard that i2 do not win the case, otherwise the loss will be devastating. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73288-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-i?source=feed#comment-158298 158298 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:25:51 -0400
Stinnet was obviously another corp. hopper, very expensive but very unimpressive in terms of performance. A smooth talker but more like a car saleswoman, as to SCM, I don't think she can have a deep conversation with a client who needed help.

As to J. Cummings, he was the biggest joke. Nobody can stay awake after listening to his presentation for 10 minutes. An i2 shareholder got so pissed and asked McGrath how in the world did the guy get that job.

Thank God the team is all out of i2.

McGrath was a quick cost cutter or so-called a chain-saw and he was more than fairly compensated. The i2 board should have let him go 7 months earlier; in other words, the renewed of his last year contract was a mistake and they had to let him go 5 months before the term ended.

As to the two Wall Street analysts mentioned, you just have to listen to them asking questions at i2 conference calls to realize how clueless these two were. When i2 had a good quarter, they move their target a few bucks higher and vise versa, these people have out-lived their usefulness since i2 is all on fair disclosure.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73288-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-i?source=feed#comment-158147 158147 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:22:55 -0400
It cost almost 12 cents per share per year of i2 earnings to have McGrath, he was paid $1 million plus and he ran over $1 million in charter plane and huge stocks and stock options and all kind of perks you can think of. This man is a typical greed, how can someone ran that kind of tab while the company and all its shareholders were trying to grab a piece of wood just to stay alive?

Some people don't like Chatterjee but this man is very well respected in i2 and in SCM world. He was born in India with a little accent like all foreign born Americans but he's getting a lot better in presiding the earning conference calls.

Some of those American born CEO's are such smooth talkers, they scar me to death.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73288-i2-technologies-turnaround-part-i?source=feed#comment-157684 157684 Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:09:14 -0400
As someone who has partnered and worked closely with i2 for over a decade, the only success since Greg Brady was President occurred during the 29 months when Michael McGrath and his turnaround team were in place at i2. They are the individuals to thank for delivering positive results for i2’s growth, not an individual who is collecting off the coattails of success from their efforts.

Chatterjee has been inside the company since 2000 when he joined as COO. He did not deliver results, changes were made and the board searched for a CEO who had experience to make it happen.

As one of the most respected individuals in the supply chain consulting world, co-founder of PRTM and the father of SCOR, McGrath resided on i2’s board. After a long, extensive, and unsuccessful search for CEO, the board turned to McGrath and asked him to consider becoming the CEO to take on the turnaround. McGrath felt with support from the board and his knowledge in the market he could make a difference and agreed.

He built a management team of key individuals who were respected in the market and they dedicated almost 3 years to restructure, rebuild and restore a sense of stability to i2 resulting in the 11 consecutive quarters of profitability and growth. An impressive badge to earn as the company had significant SEC issues when he stepped in.

He and his team built out a strategy plan based on customer feedback. They listened to their clients and partners. Our partner program was rebuilt. Marketing and development prioritisation was designed around customer and partner input. The focus of McGrath’s team on the client resulted in the delivery of 11 profitable quarters. A successful turnaround. While he was in charge, i2’s stock went from not being listed to being relisted and hitting the mid 20's.

Many realise he and his team were forced out of i2 and the market has responded to the threat of stability which is reflected in i2’s continual stock drop.

To claim Pallab Chatterjee as a success because i2 has experienced a couple of follow on successful quarters since McGrath's release is preposterous. Those who are experienced in covering the enterprise software market recognise it takes 3 to 4 quarters to identify a project and bring it to closure due to the length of building out custom demonstrations, contract negotiations, and hitting the budgeting cycles of companies at the right time. These 2 quarters, and probably the next 2, are results from the momentum of the changes put into affect under McGrath's team. Simply check with i2 clients and partners.

The analysts you mention in your article are top analysts in the software market. They are highly respected by Wall Street, have an accuracy rate which is impressive and they do not make comments based on hearsay. By placing your message on a public post board without having your facts straight on their coverage of i2 is completely unprofessional and not credible.

If you wish to document the facts, you need to do your research in a balanced manner. In the process of developing your article, did you interview McGrath, Cummings, Walravens, or others? Did you stop to review the history of this company? Do you realise that pipeline is usually 3-4 quarters deep and the last 2 quarters are simply a continuation of the successful development created by McGrath and his team?

Your comments on the SAP lawsuit are valid with one exception. The legal action was initiated by McGrath. He was the person to recognise the patent infringement. He took the legal action required which now has set i2 up for significant gains.

McGrath and those he hired to help turnaround the company hold consistent, successful track records outside of i2. They delivered results for i2 only to be thanked by being ousted by the old regime.

Pallab Chatterjee’s track record has not been impressive. His scorecard cannot be measured until you have year over year results to show whether or not he can deliver.

You need to remember that many of us have worked with i2 as clients and partners for almost two decades. We know their politics, their people, and who can and cannot deliver. i2 had a team who was leading them to success. They stopped to listen to us as their customers and partners. Trust was being rebuilt. The listening has stopped and the arrogant approach has returned. Whether this results in continued success is yet to be determined.]]>