Formerly About Applied Materials 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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials

AMAT 248.59

+2.5%

12:51 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (21086)	7/4/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) of 70976

Justa: thanks for the info: 1. is there a link to the Cowen study? 2. Did they say: The uptick in orders predicted upturns, but a downturn in orders did not precede downturns? That would correlate with my non-statistical look at the graphs. 3. Yes, orders may be a better number to follow than the BTB. The BTB, since it's a ratio, may look better simply because billings are declining at a faster rate than bookings. Obviously, that wouldn't signal industry improvement. 4. Did they look at back-end orders vs. stock price? It looked to me like that graph had less short-term variability (=noise) than the front-end order graph. It would be curious if front-end orders were a better predictor of AMAT's price than back-end orders. 5. Did the study take into account the lag time for when booking data became available? If a May bookings trough coincided with a May stock price trough, this would not be a leading or coincident indicator, since May bookings data isn't available till June. TIA for the good info.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next