I think your argument here baffles me even more. I'll resist tossing out the usual Engel-ism ("Profits are ALWAYS BAFFLING to an AMDROID!!!!!") as I ask you to explain your argument here. If EPS shouldn't be used as a measurement of meeting expectations, what should be?
Tenchusatsu, I am not clear whether its intentional to misunderstand the intended jist of a post, or that you all are set off by certain buzzwords and therefore are unable to get the meaning of the post. But, to repeat, what I was intending to say is that Intel posters can not understand why Intel's stock price performs sluggishly when Intel is making a profit each quarter.
My point was that making a profit is only part of the game for a tech stock. Tech stocks usually have higher valuations than other stocks because they tend to show stronger revenue growth than those stocks. Therefore, if revenue growth slows, a tech stock will be penalized more because its market valuation is set higher and therefore has farther to fall. That is why, in spite of the fact that Intel has had profits the last two quarters, its stock has not made much progress. That's because its revenue growth has been sluggish.
What is baffling to me is that it seems, for at least some of the Intel posters who invest in tech stocks regularly, this concept is somewhat foreign; a concept, by the way, that is well known in the markets.
So let me repeat....I firmly believe in profits...I think its very American to want them and I am a proud American. But in addition to profits, I consider strong revenue growth equally as important when it comes to tech stocks.
ted |
