jmac,
<<We are now down 28 points and that is "substantial.">>
Not so, IMO. Substantial was when it dropped from 73 in late 1995 to 49 in early 1996, but even that proved to be nothing more than a great buying opportunity. A 15% correction doesn't even begin to worry me as I am looking past these short term irrational moves. The market does not behave rationally over days, weeks, or even months. But in the long term stock prices correlate very nicely to earnings.
<<But, not much is all it takes to change the though processes of those who actually move the stock price (you and I don't).>>
You're right we don't move the price. In the long run the only thing that moves the price up or down is Intel's financial performance. Not even the big funds can change that. Sure they can wreak havoc in the short run, but they hardly can change the fundamentals of an industry based on their trading activities.
<<Any signof a slowdown (and the Fed wants that), will slow the revolution and slow INTC's growth rates.>>
Again, very short term oriented statement. The Fed cannot change the long term course of a global revolution that has barely begun. In the US the revolution is in its infancy. In most other parts of the world it is still in the womb. The Fed's policies are relatively short lived.
<<Frankly, I believe many are worried about what the conference call
after 1stQ is going to detail.>>
I don't doubt that many are worried, especially the technology ignorant analysts of WS. After all, they understand very little about this industry or its future. They still can't see past oil companies and automobile manufacturers. Hell, they still can't understand the difference between a cyclical commodity chip producer like MU and technology leader like INTC. Can you explain how they can afford MU a PE of 35? The more ignorant you are, the more worried you are (not you personally, the Anal-ists). They still don't understand what is going on in the world of technology or how Intel fits in. But again, I point out that any worrying they are doing now or in the future will only impact the stock price in the short term. Personally, I am looking out about 20 years and until I see something changing fundamentally within the company or the industry, I will hold INTC until I retire. Call me boring, but I enjoy the get rich slow approach. It is a much more sure proposition and much less stressful. As far as looking for fundamental changes, I will always be on the look out. I am not so naive as to think that even a giant like Intel could not face problems sometime down the road. I will remain paranoid but not stressed. I follow this industry closely and have full confidence in my ability to predict fundamental changes that could adversely affect Intel's future. Cyrix and AMD's actions to date do not fit that bill. So far, I only see an Intel that is getting stronger. More products, increasing brand awareness, margins beyond reason, great management, superior marketing, inroads into third world (i.e. China) and Japan all make me very comfortable. IMO, anyone buying at 150 or 160 or 140 should have bought for these reasons and planned on holding for at least several years. I have no sympathy for those who bought trying to make a quick buck.
Good luck to all,
FF |
