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: Tony Viola who wrote (90027)	10/12/1999 8:18:00 PM
From: Bill F.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

you mean just like last quarter?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (90027)	10/12/1999 8:21:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Respond to of 186894

Tony: They acquired 4 cos. at over 3 billion. They went to .18 and have thw Merced working (simulated boot). They have recaptured Gateway business and they say the demand is really pushing their ability to keep up. It looks to me like this is a pretty good time looking forward. In addition to that the following article shows another plus: News To print this story October 12, 1999 19:18 Judge dismisses patent claim against Intel SAN FRANCISCO, Oct 12 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal district court judge on Tuesday dismissed a patent claim against Intel Corp. brought by computer maker Intergraph Corp. that became a factor in an antitrust case against Intel, the world's leading chip maker. Intergraph, a work-station computer maker, had claimed it won patent rights to a microprocessor in a deal struck with National Semiconductor more than 10 years ago. Judge Edwin Nelson, of Alamaba district court in California, reversed an earlier ruling that denied Intel's position. The case, which involved licensing and patent issues for a relatively small product, gained added significance when it became part of an antitrust complaint against Intel. The Huntsville, Ala.-based Intergraph had charged that Intel engaged in coercive and illegal behavior by failing to provide the technical information that Intergraph needed to develop its own products. Intel argued that its intellectual property rights allowed it to withhold data Intergraph was requesting. JFD

To: Tony Viola who wrote (90027)	10/12/1999 8:41:00 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Yes, indeed, we shall see... Intc missed this time... next quarter - seasonally good...may not be this time. Who says they have a better crystal ball? OG

To: Tony Viola who wrote (90027)	10/12/1999 8:59:00 PM
From: John O'Neill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

>>We'll see. Intel is conservative and usually does better than they project. USUALLY. << Tony, the problem, as i see it, is that Intel can't stand alone. Their sales are dependent on other business and i expect big dissapoint with Q4 earnings in the tech area.....the psychology is turning negative as well, and the fed is in a tightening mode..i believe they will continue to tighten next year. All the bullshit PPI's and CPI's and all the crap about "no inflation" has lost credibility...... Paul Volker is the one we have to thank for this great bull market..he had guts...Greenspan is just the bullshit of the bull market, the no substance man, who says nothing while talking at the same time I think he's blithering now...with nowhere to go...at the end of his rope...one thing they can do is induce the crash before Y2K and blame it on a Y2K panic...get them off the hook...it may be their only chance to put the blame externally...the working stiffs with 401K plans won't be happy if their money evaporates... especially once the news media gets started pumping out the news of the scandlous stuff, the manipulation/the shady deals/accounting/reporting and spinning that built the bubble....The media would obsess on this if we had a serious decline..a lot of talk shows analyzing what built the bubble. Where would the blame go?? The public would demand blaming... ...the new media goes for stuff like this......Yes Y2K..blame it on panic psychology of Y2K..then they are all off the hook.....that would mean a crash fairly soon