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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 8:57:00 AM
From: KHS	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Can't believe this defending of Niles. "Sell Intel" Come on. Sell one of the best companies in the world. Yes, maybe short and near term the stock may underperform other high fliers, but to say sell. That call may cost him his status and credibility. With SI here and now, Niles and other analyst can't afford to make too many mistakes. Hey, we are in the middle of the communications revolution. I'm long term holder of INTC and used 50 13/16 to accumulate more stock. That would have been the appropriate call.

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 9:26:00 AM
From: Diamond Jim	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Enough said. techstocks.com "I've said the same thing for 2 years, and the return on Intel hasn't been good during that period. I find it rather comical that the generic response I get has been a comparison of the returns of AMD to Intel over the past 2 years"

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 10:57:00 AM
From: herb will	Respond to of 186894

GV, “Book value”? What is the magic in book value? All that is telling you is that there is no intrinsic value in the price of the stock? Now that the Athlon is announced, launched, shipped or whatever you want to call it why would there not be a corresponding amount figured in its price? “Kool Aid”? There is no poison in the Intel brand. I heartily recommend it, especially therapeutic for the AMD induced runs. “the return on Intel hasn't been good during that period (2 Years)”? Oh yes it has. The State of Florida knows! “Niles”? All I can say is that Niles is on record. HERB

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 12:44:00 PM
From: John Hull	Respond to of 186894

GV, re;The only thing he's done is not drink the Intel Kool-Aid that give many on this thread rose colored glasses. I've said the same thing for 2 years, and the return on Intel hasn't been good during that period.' June 30, 1997 to July 1, 1999: INTC +75% S&P500 +51% ~80% (can't recall the exact figure) of mutual funds don't do as well as the S&P500 say what you want about Niles, but let's not beat on those who view INTC as a reasonable investment - the data supports this view. jh

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 12:58:00 PM
From: exhon2004	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

GVTucker: re>>AMD is now trading close to book value. It can be argued that the downside is limited on the stock, and the upside is huge. That isn't 'bizarre.' It's a concept called risk-reward.<< The downside is zero, (As in a stock price of zero). Upside is always unlimited, (The evolution of pigs could include self powered flight). In evaluating investing in AMD, (I have), one would be foolish if they did not consider the risk that this company may not remain a Going Concern. imho Greg

To: GVTucker who wrote (84801)	7/2/1999 1:07:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

<First, why is it such a 'bizarre contradiction' to like AMD even though Athlon (or whatever K7 is called these days) is make or break for AMD?> Because ole Danny Boy is rating AMD "long-term accumulate." Note the words long-term. Niles says that Athlon is make or break. He doesn't even think that Athlon is a sure win for AMD. Yet he rates the stock "long-term accumulate." <It can be argued that the downside is limited on the stock, and the upside is huge. That isn't 'bizarre.' It's a concept called risk-reward.> The downside is indeed huge. If Athlon is more break than make, creditors will be demanding Sanders' head on a platter. Then the bottom drops out very quickly. <And when it comes to Niles' opinion on Intel, it strikes me that he has done a good job in the short term earnings area, so good that a lot of people are wondering if he doesn't have an inside source at Intel. Let's see--the stock is about the same place it was when he yelled 'sell' on CNBC and the market set an all-time high yesterday--I'd say his call was pretty good.> Nice try. Did he say "sell" for the purpose of buying back later at a lower price? Or did he just say "sell" in a generic sense? I'll bet tons of people took his advice, sold INTC, and felt good about it as the stock price dropped down to the fifties. But Niles never said, "OK, now's a good time to buy," even though INTC is back on the rise. And if Niles is anything like your buddy Tom Kurlak, he won't tell anyone to buy even if INTC continues to rise and rise. Meanwhile, those who wisely ignored Niles' recommendation to sell are doing pretty well right now, thank you. <And if you're looking at the long term, his rating is the same as AMD--long term attractive.> Let's see. Intel has a long-term business plan that includes additional manufacturing capacity, plans for the new 300mm wafers and 0.13 micron technology, public roadmaps that extend out to 2002, and a willingness to reposition the business around the Internet. AMD's long-term business plan is ... er ... continue to pound Intel's fist with their face? <I find it rather comical that the generic response I get has been a comparison of the returns of AMD to Intel over the past 2 years. I'd just as soon not own either.> And I find it rather comical that you're trying to defend an analyst whose advice was to sell Intel. Not sell, then buy back. Not sell, then buy another stock, as you seem to suggest. Just sell. Who cares how the general public takes his advice, right? If INTC takes off from here, Niles can weasel his way out and say, "Well, when I said sell, I meant the short-term." Can't you see the political motivation behind Niles' words? Is that even worth defending? Tenchusatsu