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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (48597)	7/29/1999 8:13:00 PM
From: JRH	Respond to of 95453

I agree with you in your analysis. The forward multiple of 22 does seem a bit high. Acquiring shares at or below 25 is the way to go I think. I can't believe I didn't buy any at 20 when it was there. I will not miss that opportunity if it comes again. JRH

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (48597)	7/30/1999 9:40:00 AM
From: John Carpenter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

I believe valuing a cyclical stock like RIG on 2000 EPS makes the stock appear much more expensive than it really is. I prefer to predict the future value of a cyclical stock based on peak earnings power. Paradoxically, it's actually better to buy cyclicals when they have higher PEs. When PEs are low, like in 1997, it usually means we are near the peak of the cyclical earnings cycle. So, what is RIG's peak E.P.S. I feel comfortable that RIG could earn at least $4, maybe $6 per share by 2002-2003. If they earn $5, the PE on peak earnings is just 6. As long as the market is worried about the techs, oil will be the place to be. I watch $32, not $31, as a key resistance area for RIG. I have a feeling we'll break $32 this time, but I've been wrong before.