Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (62757)	6/22/1999 3:58:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571567

<I pointed out Briefing.com comments only because the intc's longs are continually announcing to this thread how incredibly profitable investing in intc stock has been for them (and how incredibly unprofitable AMD has been). Apparently they got into intc well before 1997.> You really ought to pick your comparisons more carefully. People who got into AMD around 1997 would have seen their investments drop by 50%. And people who got into AMD after 1997 would have hopped onto a roller coaster where traders profit and holders don't. Yet I keep hearing how AMD has so much potential, when in fact AMD had "potential" for several years now. The K7 introduction may be AMD's best chance to turn potential into reality, but it may very well be their last chance as well. Meanwhile, while the press and the analysts make mountains out of molehills, while they worry about Intel missing the next quarter's expectations by a penny, they easily forget that Intel has a very strong foundation, both financial and technological. Intel is trading at a P/E ratio of 29, which is small compared to the huge P/E ratios of other tech heavyweights like Microsoft and Cisco. If anyone has real upside potential, it's Intel. But of course, no one likes to talk about the long term, because it's such a boring subject. Tenchusatsu