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: DavidG who wrote (47902)	8/31/1999 3:18:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

dave, i just lengthened my bankruptcy over / under to 4 years instead of 3.5 ;-)

To: DavidG who wrote (47902)	8/31/1999 4:22:00 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 53903

$250? Montgomery analyst must have clicked the Internut multiplier box before they pressed the Calculate Target Price button. Correction will probably follow tomorrow. Seriously, why not just say $1000? or $10000? Or $10,000,000 and allow us to erase the national deficit with capital gains taxes? Show some mettle!

To: DavidG who wrote (47902)	8/31/1999 5:25:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

David, and the chorus goes on :"Viva the Scenario". $250???? in 2000, that would indicate a market capitalization of $75 Billions, well in 2000, and even in 2003, the whole DRAM market is not expected to reach $75 Billions annually. The most bullish indications for 2000, I have seen are about $35 Billions (and I doubt it will be more than about $28 billions). Even if we assume that MU will take 20% of the bullish side ($7 billion) we will still have MU selling at 10 times annual sales, and that is on the "generous side, IMHO. But, if the scenario requires putting forward absurd numbers? Why not, the street will oblige. $100 per share, here we come. Long live the "Scenario". Zeev

To: DavidG who wrote (47902)	8/31/1999 6:27:00 PM
From: MR. PANAMA (I am a PLAYER)	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Don't worry bout SBug....just give him a buck fer his coffee and let him continue with his treatise on MU.He has da capacity fer great work especially after shock treatments. Sincerely -------->>> MR. PANAMA Formerly GRIM , Bateman

To: DavidG who wrote (47902)	8/31/1999 8:25:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

David, what I find confounding about Whiz Whit's* target, other than the obvious, is why the financial press has taken a powder on it. Bloomberg's attributing the rise to the Gruntal Research Dance Troupe. CBS MArketwatch also went with Dancing Mona, and very briefly mentioned an estimate change from Banc America, although in the piece I saw they didn't provide any numbers. Dow Jones/WSJIE has positive comments coming from Soundview's Scott Randall: SoundView analyst Scott Randall told Dow Jones Newswires that he had informed clients Tuesday morning that computer-memory spot prices have again inflected upward. Shortly after issuing those comments, Randall and the some 60 investors met with Micron Technology management in California. After that meeting, Randall said he made additional positive comments. And the only thing on Whit was: A brief note from Banc of America Securities analyst Rick Whittington may also have provided positive momentum for Micron shares. In the late afternoon, Whittington said he raised his estimates on Micron. He hasn't yet issued any further details, a Banc of America spokeswoman said. "A brief note"? Fine. Has anyone seen that "brief note"? How brief? Did he change his estimates? How did he support this target? I reject the notion that the because the contents of that "brief note" (or any other research item put out by an analyst) may be deemeed "proprietary" by its authors, therefore one cannot transmit its contents in a public forum for the purpose of analysis and criticsim. The "fair use" exemption of the copyright laws is intended to prevent many things. One of it's intentions is to protect criticism and allow public scrutiny. For example, I wouldn't advocate publishing sell-side research verbatim with the sole intention of transmitting its contents for investment uses. However, I do advocate critiquing conclusions and reasoning. If the guy put out a $250 target for CY2000, that's probably something that deserves some critiquing. It's a shame the financial press allows itself to be put on a leash and walked. Good trading, Tom FWIW, if you're ever in Philly and you want to order a cheesesteak like the locals say - "Whiz Wit". Which translates to - "I'd like a cheesesteak with Cheese Whiz and onions, please". NOTE BENE* NEVER under ANY circumstances (even if it is 3 a.m. and you would have a hard time telling the difference between a cheesesteak and a pair of discarded Chuck Taylors) utter the phrase "Whiz Wit with onions". Why? Because "onions is wit", therefore it's redundant...not to mention the fact that everyone in line at Geno's will know you're a tourist. I note this only because I have a feeling that whatever amount of intelligence went into that price target is comparable to or slightly exceeds the innate intelligence of the Whiz Wit at Geno's I'm about to grab <g>