Ref < Pete, however, I believe, is far more knowledgable >
Even though Osha is a light weight, you are seriously insulting Osha and anyone else with the above statement.
Message 15733890
In the above post Pete reached an outrageous conclusion out of thin air, just like Joe Osha ,and then spent the last few months rationalizing what he said. Despite everything, Joe has more accounting knowledge than Pete, a better technical overview and does give up when proven wrong. Pete is a tireless debator and wears out the opponent by spouting endless and irrelevant technical details which obfuscate the issue, and continues to twist reality.
Joe Osha communicates clearly. He is obviously in a world of hurt,because there is little evidence of channel stuffing by Intel, and he repeatedly went out on a limb accusing Intel of stuffing the channel. To add insult to injury, AMD,his recommended stock, appears to be the one guilty of channel stuffing. TMTA the other horse he bet upon is bleeding badly, and will not survive without a fresh infusion of capital.
I am cynical about all financial analysts. Their objective is to create portfolio churn, which they do admirably. They may add useful analysis, but most of the time they reach sweeping conclusions by seat of the pant analysis. Over the years I have seen Kurlak do dramatic flip flops on Intel without adequate justification. This thread contributes better analysis than the highly paid bug guns. |
