Harry, RE: You could be right. But in my experience, I cannot think of another world class company that gets such knee jerk bad treatment from analysts. You never hear of an analyst take on a GE or and MSFT. Do you think if one of GE's competitors had a conference call, the analysts would rush out and downgrade GE? I doubt it.
Bunk.
First, look at the numbers. 40 analysts track INTC, 33 have some form of a buy, 7 have holds. The average rating (with 5 being the highest) is 4.5. 36 analysts track MSFT, 31 have buy, 4 have hold, 1 has a sell, average rating of 4.528--not much difference there. 23 analysts track GE, 18 have buys, 4 have hold, 1 has a sell, average rating of 4.304, not as good as Intel. For comparison purposes, the average US stock is rated 4.166; the average stock in the S&P 500 is rated 4.133. Contrary to what you state, Intel usually gets the benefit of the doubt from the analyst community.
Second, you always hear of an analyst take on MSFT or GE, just like INTC. Did you see the analyst report on the break up value of MSFT recently? It put the break up value of MSFT in the mid 60's. Did you see David Tice's piece on GE that called the company a 'hedge fund in drag'?
Finally, you are correct to a certain extent that INTC seems to have a harsher reaction sometimes to negative analyst statements. Right or wrong, Wall Street like predictable earnings. MSFT and GE have much more predictable and consistent earnings growth than INTC. Thus, the different reaction when a perception of a problem occurs. INTC, fine stock that it is, is in a more volatile earnings environment than MSFT or GE. Earnings are also much less easily manipulated. If you're a long term investor in INTC, you've either got to learn to live with that or sell the stock. |
