Jules,
I am sorry if I misquoted you. It was not intended. Please let me know where it was so that I can rectify it.
At one time I did have a complete profile. However, the degrees, intstitutions, profession and activities resulted in a number of assumptions about me, and responses to me, that obscured rather than facilitated the dialogue. I decided that I would prefer that my commentary be weighed on its own merit.
Thank you for your welcome to the Intc bb. While I am a Cyrix investor now, I have been a very heavy Intel investor in the past, and some of the commentary and points made in response to mine, and other posts, make me have second thoughts about my decision. I just find it difficult to imagine that Intel can continue to grow at this rate. It is truly a phenomenal company, and it may be that I do not have the imagination to project 40% increases in demand year after year without competition. I also have been a long time holder of BA. In contrast to Intel, BA has a product that is so complex, and requires such immense capital aggregates, that only countries can afford to underwrite such an enterprise and now, the only real competition to BA is Airbus Industries. I really can not imagine anyone breaking the BA monopoly. However, a microchip, while also requiring immense capitalization for the fabs, does not require immense capitalization for the design. I think this is where Intel has some vulnerability, and I think with some of the recent confusion I jokingly alluded to in my post earlier today, I wonder if Intel's profits will be subject to a change in market forces (a la Micron last year when Whittington was predicting the stock would earn $11 and be at $200.)
Bob |
