Hi Greg, RE: "I don't think they ignored the Yu/Splinter reorg."
I think he ignored the reorg.
Unrelated to that, his rumor about McKinley seems off. I haven't read anything in the news that indicates McKinley has slipped.
His rumor about capital spending was off per Steve's article quoting Barrett's witty comment.
Jonathan seems to have a strength with dealers/brokers, as we discovered last summer, so I think this area should be encouraged and respected, because it is really needed in the industry.
However, aside from the dealers where his strength is, the other aspects of his report indicate he's not at the level of being reliable.
In fact, the tone of the article sounded very one-way. It certainly wasn't a presentation of the pros/cons, bur rather a one-way article. This gave it a sense of an agenda.
Tony had suggested Jonathan has an agenda. I didn't think so, until I read the article you (Greg) posted, where this became more clear. But I suspect his agenda is something as simple as, "I have to quickly write a negative article on Intel." (edit: but why so blindly one-sided? what's the agenda?) His report seems to be "1" or "0". Not a thoughtful analysis that's somewhere in-between. He also leaves out several obvious economic factors that are playing out in our economy.
Overall, I'd give the report the following grade:
F on his rumors
A on ability to get out there and talk to dealers
Even though his dry rumors (Mary, is that the right phrase?) are inaccurate, he's worth having around just for the reason that one person is at least keeping an eye on the dealers. This thread could use more research information in this area. The lack of this and the lack of respect for market research in this area, is what caught many of us last year.
However, I agree with Steve that Jonathan really shouldn't abuse his media power by reporting rumorville inaccuracies as a way to support a one-way theme.
Regards,
Amy J |
