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: Bill Fischofer who wrote (89267)	10/2/1999 3:43:00 PM
From: Joe Gun	Respond to of 186894

Analysis of Article...... Author quotes "Yankee Group's Howard Anderson" Big Deal who is He?? It is Jay Palmer's (author) opinion that: "The shares currently trade at 33 times consensus estimates for 1999 and 28 times estimates for 2000. That's nearly twice the company's expected growth rate in 2000. If Intel's multiple were to drop to, say, 1.5 times growth, its shares would trade at around 59. And if they were to trade at one times growth, the shares would fetch just 39. Once investors wake up to the fact that Intel's glory days are over, that could easily happen." The above does not sound much different then a Web Post. In the short term the stock could do anything, I am not selling on the basis of this article. The article's effect if any will be a one day event. I doubt this pressures the stock more than a couple of points on the open.

To: Bill Fischofer who wrote (89267)	10/2/1999 3:56:00 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Bill, The sub-$1000 PC was for INTC a wake-up call the same way the 1995 arrival of the Internet was for MSFT. And just as MSFT turned on a dime in response to its challenge, so did INTC Well said. NSM, after having acquiring upstart Cyrix amid great fanfare, was forced to fold its PC processor tent altogether The article fails to mention petty details like this, or the fact that INTC has somewhere around $12B in cash, while its rivals are struggling to keep their heads above water. Re: INTC's "fluff" valuation INTC is, IMHO deserving of a premium multiple. To say they should trade at a below market multiple is ludicrous. Re: "Intel Inside" no longer important I believe the exact opposite will prove to be true. Why don't we ask someone like T. Viola who actually works in the industry whether he prefers an "Intel Inside" or a chip from AMD. I wonder if the author interviewed tech people before printing this(that was rhetorical BTW) The article also fails to mention how its competitors' chips crash machines at demonstrations(Athlon), while Intel's goes about its duty. All in all, it's one thing to say that challenges are ahead. That is obvious, especially in the extremely competitive tech-land. However, it is another thing altogether to link this with shortcomings of current strategies, which IMHO they did not even come close to doing. BK

To: Bill Fischofer who wrote (89267)	10/2/1999 5:41:00 PM
From: IVAN1	Respond to of 186894

Something the Barrons article left out. What about the server farm business? It didn't get even a mention in the article.

To: Bill Fischofer who wrote (89267)	10/2/1999 8:14:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Bill - Re: ", Palmer completely misses the obvious implications of his own reporting. The sub-$1000 PC was for INTC a wake-up call the same way the 1995 arrival of the Internet was for MSFT. And just as MSFT turned on a dime in response to its challenge, so did INTC. So successful was INTC in recapturing the low end of the PC market with its Celeron initiative that AMD's stock, after a brief rise from the mat last year, is back trading at 1983 levels and NSM, after having acquiring upstart Cyrix amid great fanfare, was forced to fold its PC processor tent altogether. Moreover, to ensure its ability to lead the low-end of future markets, INTC has invested significantly in the StrongARM technology it acquired from Digital. And INTC has aggressively established beachheads in the networking chip market through its Level One and related acquisitions making it clear that no high-growth area of chip technology is safe from INTC competition." Very good counterpoints. Thanks. Paul

To: Bill Fischofer who wrote (89267)	10/2/1999 11:14:00 PM
From: nihil	Respond to of 186894

Yes indeed. I'd like a 15 point drop if that could be arranged. I'm loaded with 60-55 call spreads I'd like to uncover sometime this year. I'd also like to sell some 60 puts when they get high enough. Oh hell, make them 75's.