<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: At $590M, Did Cisco Pay Too Much for Flip?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:07:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pure Digital CEO Leaving Cisco; Was Flip Deal a Flop?: Online Video News &#171;</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-590053</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pure Digital CEO Leaving Cisco; Was Flip Deal a Flop?: Online Video News &#171;]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 22:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-590053</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] many were left scratching their heads about why Cisco would buy a low-end camera maker, the company has always positioned the acquisition [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] many were left scratching their heads about why Cisco would buy a low-end camera maker, the company has always positioned the acquisition [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Why Juniper&#8217;s Polycom Partnership is Destined to Fail &#8211; GigaOM</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164405</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Why Juniper&#8217;s Polycom Partnership is Destined to Fail &#8211; GigaOM]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164405</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] is tying its networking expertise to servers, video conferencing gear, consumer equipment and whatever else it thinks it can get away with, because it can guarantee a better quality of [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is tying its networking expertise to servers, video conferencing gear, consumer equipment and whatever else it thinks it can get away with, because it can guarantee a better quality of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cisco Sid</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164404</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cisco Sid]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164404</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Really? the &quot;iPod&quot; of the camcorder industry?- More like the &quot;zune&quot;!

How many brand name HD camcorders do you know of? How many mobile phones will be out there with HD next year?

this is a rediculous price in a market where Cisco has struggeld to compete and sell. nyone remember the &quot;kiss&quot; acquisition? Another consumer white elephant company.

I&#039;ll take panasonic, sony, sanyo over Cisco any day! Or better still Samsung or iPhone.

This company has only sold 2 million units! Nortel is up for sale at a cheaper price! Madness.... the shareholders should be asking JC just what on earth was he thinking.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really? the &#8220;iPod&#8221; of the camcorder industry?- More like the &#8220;zune&#8221;!</p>
<p>How many brand name HD camcorders do you know of? How many mobile phones will be out there with HD next year?</p>
<p>this is a rediculous price in a market where Cisco has struggeld to compete and sell. nyone remember the &#8220;kiss&#8221; acquisition? Another consumer white elephant company.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll take panasonic, sony, sanyo over Cisco any day! Or better still Samsung or iPhone.</p>
<p>This company has only sold 2 million units! Nortel is up for sale at a cheaper price! Madness&#8230;. the shareholders should be asking JC just what on earth was he thinking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cisco Sid</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164403</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cisco Sid]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cisco are loosing the plot- how much for a company that has only sold 2 million units?

This is an expensive white elephant.  When will Cisco look outside of the US and understand what is going on on a global scale?  There are many many different types of HD video cameras available today.  So this can plug directly into a PC or USB port?- big deal.

Do you think that cell phones won&#039;t have that capability next year?  The Samsung Omnia provides HD 720p video recording capability and you can upload direct to youtube without going through a PC using wifi.

What about the latest iPhone with video?

Cisco concentrate on &quot;changing the way we live, work, and learn&quot; -leave out the &quot;play&quot; part, we just cannot compete agianst mobile phone manufacturers, sony, sanyo, panasonic, etc.

This acquistion was all down to J. Chambers&#039; evangelical fixation on video. We have skype- we don&#039;t need telepresence at home.  We have mobile phones- we don&#039;t need to carry yet another device around with us.  We all have PCs at home- don&#039;t think we will all rush out to get a Scientific Atlanda box under our TVs to upload flip videos to some obscure Cisco social networking site.

Reseach your customers, understand the market, understand the competition and stop wasting your share-holders money!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cisco are loosing the plot- how much for a company that has only sold 2 million units?</p>
<p>This is an expensive white elephant.  When will Cisco look outside of the US and understand what is going on on a global scale?  There are many many different types of HD video cameras available today.  So this can plug directly into a PC or USB port?- big deal.</p>
<p>Do you think that cell phones won&#8217;t have that capability next year?  The Samsung Omnia provides HD 720p video recording capability and you can upload direct to youtube without going through a PC using wifi.</p>
<p>What about the latest iPhone with video?</p>
<p>Cisco concentrate on &#8220;changing the way we live, work, and learn&#8221; -leave out the &#8220;play&#8221; part, we just cannot compete agianst mobile phone manufacturers, sony, sanyo, panasonic, etc.</p>
<p>This acquistion was all down to J. Chambers&#8217; evangelical fixation on video. We have skype- we don&#8217;t need telepresence at home.  We have mobile phones- we don&#8217;t need to carry yet another device around with us.  We all have PCs at home- don&#8217;t think we will all rush out to get a Scientific Atlanda box under our TVs to upload flip videos to some obscure Cisco social networking site.</p>
<p>Reseach your customers, understand the market, understand the competition and stop wasting your share-holders money!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Does Cisco&#8217;s Exec Move Mean It Will Be Serious Challenger to Apple?</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164402</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Does Cisco&#8217;s Exec Move Mean It Will Be Serious Challenger to Apple?]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] consumer business. While some viewed the company&#8217;s acquisition of Pure Digital as an expensive move, Cisco gained through the purchase a highly respected consumer executive, Jonathan Kaplan. During [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] consumer business. While some viewed the company&#8217;s acquisition of Pure Digital as an expensive move, Cisco gained through the purchase a highly respected consumer executive, Jonathan Kaplan. During [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cisco Flips Off The Competition</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164401</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cisco Flips Off The Competition]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 09:30:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] lot of people are scratching their heads about the Pure Digital acquisition by Cisco. I did too, until I started thinking about [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] lot of people are scratching their heads about the Pure Digital acquisition by Cisco. I did too, until I started thinking about [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164400</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 06:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164400</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So perhaps Pure Digital gave Cisco their Get Lost price, and Chambers said sure. Or there was a bidding war and Cisco...won.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So perhaps Pure Digital gave Cisco their Get Lost price, and Chambers said sure. Or there was a bidding war and Cisco&#8230;won.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Habib Ullah Khan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164399</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Habib Ullah Khan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164399</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alan you have it spot on. The payment is for a company based out of San Francisco that not only took market share from the 990 pound gorilla Sony but also kept a plethora of Chinese companies at bay. Engaged in a &quot;Battle of the Bulge&quot; with Asian companies across geographies in its core business it&#039;s an attribute Cisco deeply respects.

I&#039;d like to add a lesser visited point. Cisco believes in a deep HR bench. It has that plenty in its core routing and switching and related Advanced technology and in its Broadcast area. It has a much more fragile bench on the consumer side. In fact one can cautiously argue its their biggest potential mis step in the making especially considering the Billions Cisco will surely spend on consumer side of the business in the coming months and years. This deal brings on people who Cisco gets as leaders and who strengthen that bench. I do believe the money is well spent if they can keep the team and integrate it within their broader consumer aspirations.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alan you have it spot on. The payment is for a company based out of San Francisco that not only took market share from the 990 pound gorilla Sony but also kept a plethora of Chinese companies at bay. Engaged in a &#8220;Battle of the Bulge&#8221; with Asian companies across geographies in its core business it&#8217;s an attribute Cisco deeply respects.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to add a lesser visited point. Cisco believes in a deep HR bench. It has that plenty in its core routing and switching and related Advanced technology and in its Broadcast area. It has a much more fragile bench on the consumer side. In fact one can cautiously argue its their biggest potential mis step in the making especially considering the Billions Cisco will surely spend on consumer side of the business in the coming months and years. This deal brings on people who Cisco gets as leaders and who strengthen that bench. I do believe the money is well spent if they can keep the team and integrate it within their broader consumer aspirations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Kopelman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164398</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jesse Kopelman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Actually, it&#039;s half a billion in stock. So the actual amount of money it takes away from other projects is exactly the amount of dilution to the stock value, not the acquisition price. The likely amount involved may not even be in hundreds of millions.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, it&#8217;s half a billion in stock. So the actual amount of money it takes away from other projects is exactly the amount of dilution to the stock value, not the acquisition price. The likely amount involved may not even be in hundreds of millions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Kopelman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164397</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jesse Kopelman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:27:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m pretty sure Panasonic beat Canon to 720p recording. My TZ5 does this and It&#039;s been out for a good while. Lately it seems more like Canon is playing cathup to Panasonic than the other way around. They just released high optical zoom compact models to compete with the Panasonic TZ line that has been going strong for 3 or 4 years now.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure Panasonic beat Canon to 720p recording. My TZ5 does this and It&#8217;s been out for a good while. Lately it seems more like Canon is playing cathup to Panasonic than the other way around. They just released high optical zoom compact models to compete with the Panasonic TZ line that has been going strong for 3 or 4 years now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DailyWireless &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Friday Links: Did Cisco Overspend? Portland&#8217;s WiMAX</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164396</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DailyWireless &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Friday Links: Did Cisco Overspend? Portland&#8217;s WiMAX]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:20:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164396</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Gigaom wonders if Cisco overspent on the purchase of Pure Digital - the makers of the Flip Video cameras. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Gigaom wonders if Cisco overspent on the purchase of Pure Digital &#8211; the makers of the Flip Video cameras. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vahe Kassardjian</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164395</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vahe Kassardjian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164395</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From a purely accounting perspective and based on accepted ratios, Cisco may have overpaid for Pure Digital Tech. However, Cisco acquired the iPod of the camcorder industry and the brains that produced it.

A few years from now, as selling routers and other low-margin network equipments becomes a commodity, I trust most profits will come from this new business division.  In summary, I think this was a fair price for Cisco to pay to get in this business. Companies that are already established in this industry segment wouldn&#039;t (and probably didn&#039;t) accept to pay this price.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From a purely accounting perspective and based on accepted ratios, Cisco may have overpaid for Pure Digital Tech. However, Cisco acquired the iPod of the camcorder industry and the brains that produced it.</p>
<p>A few years from now, as selling routers and other low-margin network equipments becomes a commodity, I trust most profits will come from this new business division.  In summary, I think this was a fair price for Cisco to pay to get in this business. Companies that are already established in this industry segment wouldn&#8217;t (and probably didn&#8217;t) accept to pay this price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Kuhn</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164394</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martin Kuhn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:44:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164394</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Om - I believe you are correct. Cisco significantly overpaid

Currently two great CE brands, Sony and Panasonic are trading at 1/13 and 1/11 of the multiple that Cisco paid for Pure Digital


		Mkcap	Sales	Multiple

Sony		20,59	89,6	0,23
Panasonic		24,25	91,6	0,26
Pure Digital	590	200	2,95]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Om &#8211; I believe you are correct. Cisco significantly overpaid</p>
<p>Currently two great CE brands, Sony and Panasonic are trading at 1/13 and 1/11 of the multiple that Cisco paid for Pure Digital</p>
<p>		Mkcap	Sales	Multiple</p>
<p>Sony		20,59	89,6	0,23<br />
Panasonic		24,25	91,6	0,26<br />
Pure Digital	590	200	2,95</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: masumlar</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164393</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[masumlar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164393</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am reminded of the SpinBrush product created by John Oshser and sold to P&amp;G. Low priced tooth brusht ($5-$6) that disrupted Braun and $70 electric tooth brush market. That product caught on like fire and had enormous momentum . The $80 competitors did try to scale down..not much success.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am reminded of the SpinBrush product created by John Oshser and sold to P&amp;G. Low priced tooth brusht ($5-$6) that disrupted Braun and $70 electric tooth brush market. That product caught on like fire and had enormous momentum . The $80 competitors did try to scale down..not much success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raghu</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164392</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Raghu]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 06:26:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164392</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@ Jorack,

Agree with your comments on the tech capabilities and quality levels of a Canon camera especially when you can shoot a 720p, compared to a flip.

However, i dont think cisco would have bought the Flip to just get an entry into the consumer electronics arena and compete agains the canon&#039;s of the world, right? I have seen my friends use a Flip which is really a simple, awesome product with high utility and clean software solutions that even kids or soccer mom&#039;s as you said, can use it with ease.

So, could the Flip be a buy of not just a great user friendly product but also of a strong  technology / software component that can be embedded into Cisco&#039;s home video products like set-top boxes, consumer telepresence capabilities etc? If that&#039;s the case, I dont think a 2.5-3x revenue might be an overpay, especially if you look at it from the perspective of not just a nice consumer product driving video but also a technology solution play that can be the gateway for future network video solutions. (which probably drives more top / bottom line $ for cisco).

Again, as always, only time will tell for the not so obvious deals...but I think this might be an interesting one.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Jorack,</p>
<p>Agree with your comments on the tech capabilities and quality levels of a Canon camera especially when you can shoot a 720p, compared to a flip.</p>
<p>However, i dont think cisco would have bought the Flip to just get an entry into the consumer electronics arena and compete agains the canon&#8217;s of the world, right? I have seen my friends use a Flip which is really a simple, awesome product with high utility and clean software solutions that even kids or soccer mom&#8217;s as you said, can use it with ease.</p>
<p>So, could the Flip be a buy of not just a great user friendly product but also of a strong  technology / software component that can be embedded into Cisco&#8217;s home video products like set-top boxes, consumer telepresence capabilities etc? If that&#8217;s the case, I dont think a 2.5-3x revenue might be an overpay, especially if you look at it from the perspective of not just a nice consumer product driving video but also a technology solution play that can be the gateway for future network video solutions. (which probably drives more top / bottom line $ for cisco).</p>
<p>Again, as always, only time will tell for the not so obvious deals&#8230;but I think this might be an interesting one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jorack</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/03/19/at-590m-did-cisco-pay-too-much-for-flip/#comment-164391</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jorack]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 05:15:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=42972#comment-164391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[See -- I think that is at the heart of what Om asked originally: Did Cisco pay too much?

They can have the smartest marketing guys in the room, but if their niche was founded on &quot;non proprietary&quot; technology as you point out above, then Cisco will need to complement that marketing genius with good R&amp;D to make the Flip a viable future HD competitor when the low end point and shoot cameras offer 720p.

Think about the chaos, if Apple included 720 or 1080 in the next 1  or 2 generations of the iPhone or Touch.

Flip is a great niche device, but the market and perceptions move swift.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See &#8212; I think that is at the heart of what Om asked originally: Did Cisco pay too much?</p>
<p>They can have the smartest marketing guys in the room, but if their niche was founded on &#8220;non proprietary&#8221; technology as you point out above, then Cisco will need to complement that marketing genius with good R&amp;D to make the Flip a viable future HD competitor when the low end point and shoot cameras offer 720p.</p>
<p>Think about the chaos, if Apple included 720 or 1080 in the next 1  or 2 generations of the iPhone or Touch.</p>
<p>Flip is a great niche device, but the market and perceptions move swift.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

