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: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (88898)	9/25/1999 12:54:00 AM
From: kash johal	Respond to of 186894

Jules, Re:"Anyway, if Dan is correct, than Drew Peck's warning yesterday, of shortages in PC components should have no impact on Intel. After all, there should now be a supply of an additional 2M units available for shipment in Q4. My point is that both analysts can't be right, and INTC shouldn't have been taken down twice based on these conflicting negative comments." The real concern for shortages IS NOT CPU's. Both AMD and INTEL have plenty of capacity right now. The big shortages (before Taiwan blow up) has been DRAM and Chipsets. With Taiwan shutdown for 1-2-3 weeks the big concern is things like Graphics chips, chip sets etc. Remember 80-90% of all graphics chips are made by TSMC and UMC. And a MB is pretty useless without a graphics card or a chip set. On the DRAM I am less concerned. PC guys can offer machines with less DRAM and easily cover the shortage of 5-10%. The whole chipset situation has roiled again due to camino problems but we are likely OK on those as only 35-40% of chipsets come from Taiwan. regards, kash

To: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (88898)	9/25/1999 8:05:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Short term blips=long term buying opportunities IMO, INTC at 89 had gotten ahead of itself anyway. I expressed this opinion at the time. It was nice to see the rally, but such a valuation required near perfect execution and problem free external conditions. We currently have neither with the product delay and the earthquake. My year end target has been 80 since January and although I now think this will be exceeded, INTC in the 70's at this point in time is not a disappointment to me. Earthquake, product delay, Dan (Kurlak wannabe) Niles, etc. are momentary blips.....all which will pass leaving nothing in their wake but memories of another buying opportunity. These events are truly meaningless as far as Intel's long term valuation is concerned. IMO, Intel's long term prospects continue to look better than ever. The analysis is simple. You just have to keep asking yourself, 'what is going to be the single biggest influence in the global economy and our societies during our lifetimes'....the answer is clearly technology. A company like Intel with a proven track record of leadership, execution, adaptability, and ability to recover from setbacks/mis-steps combined with tremendous resources (including people, capital, cash, and knowledge) is going to benefit as much as anyone from this fundamental ever expanding revolution. The real exciting part is that the revolution has barely started. Good luck to all, FF

To: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (88898)	9/25/1999 10:46:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Jules - Re: ". My point is that both analysts can't be right, and INTC shouldn't have been taken down twice based on these conflicting negative comments." I understand that - and agree with you. However, my point was that Dan Niles has VERY GOOD INSIDE INFORMATION. Paul

To: Jules B. Garfunkel who wrote (88898)	9/25/1999 12:25:00 PM
From: Harry Landsiedel	Respond to of 186894

Jules B. Garfunkel. Re: "My point is that both analysts can't be right, and INTC shouldn't have been taken down twice based on these conflicting negative comments." Good point. It just demonstrates, once again, they high level of emotion this company provokes among analysts. It occurs to me that it may not be just the technology companies that are volatile, but we seem to attract the most volatile analysts too! And Intel seems to attract some of the most volatile, at least at this time in its history. But look on the bright side. Of all the major tech companies that Steve Balmer referred to in his broadside about overvaluation, Intel at Friday's close trades closer to its estimated long term growth rate and intrinsic value than any other that I know of. HL