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: Mary Cluney who wrote (85004)	7/6/1999 6:24:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Maty - Re: "I strongly disagree with you and GVTucker who basically say that anlayst have no impact on share prices. " I never said that. In the long term, Intel's performance will dictate their share price. Re: "When a Dan Niles predicts earnings and revenues is one thing, but to recommend buy and sell advice is entirely a different matter. he should just lay out the facts as he "sees" it and leave the judgement to others." I think you better take that one up with Damn Niles - not me. Paul

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (85004)	7/7/1999 4:35:00 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE: "he should just lay out the facts as he "sees" it" I agree - And I'd like to see analysts go portal and display their facts, assumptions and calculations online for everyone to see, e.g. their spreadsheet. I'm not interested in a PR which states only their opinion/rating and lacks assumptions, data, calc.s, etc. Best, Amy J

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (85004)	7/7/1999 7:37:00 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, RE: I agree that there is some correlation between share prices and the performance of the company - but whether a company sells for 20X's earnings or 50X's earnings has more to do with sentiment - and that is largely based on the collective propaganda of all the "analysts" who cover the company on a full time basis or writers who write stories for Barron's, Wall Street Journal, whatever, on a one time basis. I think that Wall St. follows sentiment rather than creates it. The reason that every major house on Wall St. has an analyst that covers YHOO is because the stock has performed very well, not the other way around. My guess on sentiment is that the first buyers of successful companies tend to be industry insiders. Next comes the buy side. Only then does Wall St. enter the picture. Specifically regarding Intel, Wall St. isn't going to change the buy sides memory of the 80's when the stock traded at single digit multiples after the tech industry peaked in 1983. Is this skepticism warranted? Probably not. But it's there. And no matter what Wall St. says (70% of the Intel analysts have the stock at a 'buy'), the valuation will only change slowly, as long as Intel can demonstrate that it can weather a recession better. This was happening throughout the 90's, as Intel's valuation grew steadily from a multiple around 12 to the current multiple around 30. When a Dan Niles predicts earnings and revenues is one thing, but to recommend buy and sell advice is entirely a different matter. he should just lay out the facts as he "sees" it and leave the judgement to others. The main use of any analyst is his data. It is the rare buy side manager that pays attention to opinions. (In fact, I rarely ever speak to analysts who agree with my opinion on a stock. The conversation would be pretty irrelevant. The most valuable thing I can find is a bright analyst who disagrees with me.) And, if an analyst makes a recommendation that A) disagrees with you and B) moves the stock, do what Paul did--vote with your $. If you're right, you'll win.