Re:but when you do any kind of comparison - Intel P/E seems extraordinarily low. However, people with a vested interest in keeping Intel prices low will frequently cite historical P/E values to scare investors and keep Intel prices down. They rarely get
into Intel Technology, Intel dominance in it's market, and the future of that technology going forward beyond 2 Qtrs.
I had intend to stop, but some of the stuff above is just wrong.
I recently shared several comparisons which showed at least some
evidence that Intel's current PE MAY be high, not low.
I am here because of Intel's technology and am much better off
financially because of it. But, Mary, Intel has to spend 5 or 6
billion per year in research to keep that technology at the top
of the heap. The PE that they are accorded by the market is
reflective of that and other risks associated with the company.
Many of us remember that for a long time DEC was king, Cray was
king, and heaven only knows how many other companies ruled the
road.
I am not trying to scare anyone about anything. In fact, I think
most people on the thread are probably beyond that (Bald Man
from Mars, perhaps excluded, bless his heart) and there are plenty
of people here that understand what I am saying. I dont doubt
for a minute that TK is doing his level best to make money by
saying whatever he wants whenever he wants, but no matter what he
says, the market is not going to grant Intel a PE like Pfizer's.
They dont deserve it.
J |
