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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gottfried who wrote (32711)	10/4/1999 6:10:00 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

re: Barron's Intel article: After reading the article, I came to the opposite conclusion from the article's title. The essence of the article was that conditions are changing in Intel's business, and there is no guarantee they will adapt. Duh. In hi tech, the ground frequently shifts underneath your feet, and you have to find new (and higher) ground to stand on. Intel has had this happen to them many times, and they have a long track record of successfully adapting, and coming out of bad times with profits up 30-40-50%. They've done this so many times, that, as sure as anything is in the stock market, you can be sure Intel will be a survivor. They have moved downmarket (Celeron), upmarket (Merced, next year), and into other markets. They are the best manufacturers of chips on the planet. Things like what just happened to Apple and Motorola (oops, we finally made a good product, and now we can't make enough of them) don't happen to Dell and Intel. But, I'm not complaining. If more articles like this come out, and the Fed raises 5 times between now and the end of 2000, and the techs cycle out of favor for a while, I'll get an opportunity to add to my Intel holdings. I didn't get enough in June 1998, and, as is my habit, I sold too much too early.