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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (47037)	7/9/1999 9:14:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Hey how about that Joe Osha raising his price target. Ironclad logic. "Merrill Logic", but logic nonetheless. The new Merrill 12-month price target is $55. The rationale? Our 12 month price objective is based on a 29x multiple of next year's earnings estimate. Okay, 1.90 X 29 = 55.1 And yet, only 2 weeks ago, the price target was $45 supported by the following rationale: Our 12 month price objective for the company is $45 based on 20 times our 2000 EPS estimate of $2.25. So FY00E is lowered 15.55% (2.25 to 1.90)... ...and yet the multiple is expanded from 20 to 29. Or to put it another way, once the stock surpasses the price objective of $45, it just so happens that the multiple is EXPANDED 45% despite the fact that the estimate is LOWERED 15.55% Sound familiar? Memo to Joe Osha RE: Lack of Efficiency in Research Preparation You probably could have saved yourself a lot of time if instead of writing out that report, you just published your new price target above a photo of you mooning everyone. Since that's basically what you're doing in your report anyway, it's pretty inefficient to go on using words when the a picture that says essentially the same thing will do. So the next time you go to write up some bulls**t price target crap like that, just sit on a photocopier bare-assed and publish that as your rationale. I'd find that far less offensive because IMHO it would be infinitely more honest. Tom