Cohu, Inc. (COHU) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cohu, Inc. (COHU)

COHU 23.63

+3.6%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Gottfried who wrote (2868)	4/27/2002 12:21:57 PM
From: robert b furman	Read Replies (2) of 7827

Hi G, As promised - a little historical perspective: This study requires the referencing of Gottfried's charts of Cohu's monthly high and low stock prices overlaid on Cohu's monthly bookings.I said it many times before - these charts are a stroke of genius and truly a treasure of data.Not only are they worth a thousand words but G is gracious enough to publish the data points that make the chart. Contributions like this are just a tribute to a generous man - Thanks G !! suite101.com I hope this analysis helps all profit in the future. First some history and background: The chart shows four major semiconductor cycles from 95 to current.I am working on the assumption that the fourth cycle is in it's infancy and just coming off the bottom.Its been noted on multiple threads that these charts show a rise in bookings from a cycle bottom - plateau and then top off.(we had this discussion over on the Amat thread -G provides these charts on many semi-equip companies). My personal spin on this is the plateau period marks a transition from leading technology companies buying state of the art equipment to the laggards playing catch up and being forced to also buy the best equipment - in an effort to capture the same efficiencies and profit margins that are inherent with high efficient/yield tools.This is what James Morgan means when he says "when they come -they all come at once. It is during this transition time that all the talking heads and GURU's second guess the strength of the CAPEX cycle.Actually Capex is the wrong term - it is technology upgrades - currently 3 general kinds: 1)300 MM 2)LowK dielectric metals (copper interconnects) 3).13 micron line width - 130 nanometers. Intc says they get 500 % more chips from a 300mm wafer using 130nm line width vs 200mm 180 nanometer line width.They just said this week the chips cost 35 less than old tech mfrg. In 2001 Intc spent 7.5 Billion upgrading all there 200mm and installing the first (now productionvs pilot) 300 mm lines.The 2.4 Mghz Pentium IV is now being sold from this new 300mm line. Amd is still trying to get their 200mm lines up to 130 nanometer line widths and hope to be done by year end. Well do the math Intc is saving 35 % and AMD is at least 1 year behind.To even compete they've got to hustle or Intc can price them out of existence.(That's another story) This predatory pricing is the common mantra of the electronics industry.The efficient win market share and all the glory - the inefficient simply go broke.This is true of microprocessors - this is true of memory (Micron buying Hynex)This is true of all semiconductor chips. All of the above technology advancements require a testhandler that not only handles a chip but during the test MUST cool the chip - or else the performance of the chip is lower and/or it melts down. This is why Cohu is now in the middle of more chip test applications.It used to be their pick and place testhandler(Castle was really only needed by microprocessors) Now with cooling capabilities (Summit)they are needed for many more types of chips - memory, logic,communication etc. As the laggards hurry to keep up with the leaders - they must also knock on Cohu's door and get leading technology testhandlers that will cool the their leading technology chips. It becomes less of a "capacity utilization question" and more a "how broadly the new technology is being embraced/implemented question". Note that the 2000 cycle was uniquely large in that the semi cycle included semiconductors and a historically large buildout of communications networks.The next cycle will not be as robust - see csco,lu,wcom and jdsu for more gruesome proof. So in anticipating this next cycle look more to the 96 and 98 cycles for time durations and percent rises.Anything over that will be a nice gift but we shouldn't hold our breath. JMHO I ramble this Saturday morning.One more time: suite101.com 1996 Dip after Bottom: Bookings bottom in September 1996 @ $778 Price double bottoms in August and November @ 14.76 BOOKINGS INCREASE FOR 13 MONTHS STRAIGHT PRICE GOES UP FOR 5 MONTHS after bookings reverse PRICE THEN DIPS : 02/14/97 -HIGH @28.50 33 trading days later hits its low 21.50 PRICE DIP WAS 75.44% of the high ( 21.50/28.50) 1998 Dip after Bottom: Bookings bottom in September 1998 @ $481 Price bottoms in October 1998 @ 12.00 (10/16/98) BOOKINGS INCREASE FOR 25 MONTHS (NOTE COMMUNICATION BUILDOUT/BOOM -NOT SUSTAINABLE) PRICE GOES UP FOR 5 MONTHS AFTER BOOKINGS REVERSE PRICE THEN DIPS: 02/01/99 high @ 34.44 36 trading days later hits its low @21.12 PRICE DIP WAS 61.32 % of the high(21.12/34.44) 2002 DIP AFTER BOTTOM: BOOKINGS BOTTOM IN NOV 01 @ $589 PRICE BOTTOMS IN September 2001 @13.05 price bottoms before bookings - this breaks pattern but then 9/11 rewrote history Normally price would have bottomed in December. Bookings have incresed since November bottom. Price has had a nice increase and guess what the 5 month dip (after bookings reverse)if the pattern repeats is due to occur in April. Recent high of stock = $30.65 on 04/17/02 30.65 x 96 dip factor .7544 = 23.12 30.65 x 98 dip factor .6132 + 18.80 I remember 98 and it was scary "Asian Contagion" and semi equip stocks almost slod for book value and in eatreme cases cash value. I think 96 dip factor is more resonable.We are in an improving economy.There will be a lot of noise about double bottoms but I think we'll have a stronger second half than first half in 02. I also like the 96 dip factor because it comes eerily close to my much referenced Pivot zpoint as defined by William O'neille. Cohu currently - like in 1996 has had a longer term bottom which features a double bottom. 1996 Price hit 14.76 on both 07/24/96 and 10/25/96.That sort of blows my mind.Do you suppose there was some well heeled investor that said "I'll buy as much of that as Mr Market will cough up at that price on both days - I think so,but we'll never know. 2001 Price hit 12.63 on 10/18/00 and 13.05 on 09/21/01 In between these two lows was a peak high of 23.55 on 07/03/01. William O'Neille defines a pivot point on a double bottom base as 1/8 above the middle peak between the base's two lows.23.55 + .12 = 23.67. 1998 dip factor of 23.12 is about a .55 violation of the pivot point @23.67. That would be a scary violation of what should be considered a support level and I think it would generate a lot of selling. Given a retest of September lows in the NAZ - which is the next logical level to look at since friday's action took out February 22nd's NAZ low of 1696.55 by closing at 1663.89.The next support level goes back to September 21 01 @ 1387. When other investors are thinking Cohu is going to 13 again - I'm betting it will find institutional buyers at 23.12 ish. Last but not least if 30.65 is the high to count the dip down from - that price occurred on 04/17/02. 33 trading days would put the dip lowpoint on the first week of june -June 3 thru the 7th. Darn - I hope it doesn't wreck my fishing.gg This has been long winded - I apologize. With G's wonderful charts and generous data sharing - I hope we have a little peak into the future.At least of course - IF HISTORY DOES REPEATS ITSELF LIKE IT HAS IN THE PAST. I know I know - THIS TIME ITS DIFFERENT.GG Lets make some money Bob

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next