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: Amy J who wrote (90756)	10/21/1999 3:37:00 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Amy, Thank you for your well thought-out note, I agree with your conclusions. I would think that the sales cycle for the big iron that IBM sells would be six months or more. I'm making this up as I go along, but my assumption would be that most of this hardware is custom, and therefore orders would be in house well before installation is scheduled. We're almost through October, again I assume current orders would be for installations well after the first of the year. If my assumptions are correct, shouldn't IBM have had visibility of their weakness many months ago? On another subject, after Y2K is behind us, I wonder what will happen to all those Y2K fix budget dollars? They could go to the bottom line, or they could go towards more/newer hardware, software and network stuff. The IT/MIS guys won't want their budgets cut. John

To: Amy J who wrote (90756)	10/21/1999 7:16:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Amy, >>>since MS didn't say this was why the Enterprise segment was stronger, but rather implied it was due to acceptance and adoption of their Enterprise NT solution (as oppose to a weakness with Departmental segment), I'll assume this is the case: that Enterprise solution of MS (with Intel platform) is being accepted in the market. <<< That was a real well thought out analysis of the IBM earnings announcement. Thanks again for sharing those thoughts with us. Your analysis is much better and more useful (for me) than the stuff from the professionals covering the field. Having said that, I am now going to share my emotion ladened opinions. Lou Gerstner is a master at spin. He admits he is managing the world's largest (if not greatest) technology company without a vision for the future. What he is doing now (IMO) is forcing (manipulating?)the quarterly results to match expectations and is now spinning like crazy to lower the bar for the next quarter. Book mark this comment now. IBM will beat earnings estimates next quarter. Who knows, however, what Intel will be reporting next quarter. Regardless what Intel reports - Andy Bryant will again impress us with his brilliance and his sincerity to appear completely candid and honest about how he manages the reporting of Intel's earnings. Of course, he will also impress us with his command of the details and intricacies of Intel's finances. My bet is that Intel will again match earnings expectations but the earnings will be reported in a way as if they are trying to deceive us and Andy Bryant will again come to the rescue and convince analysts that Intels future is quite favorable and analysts will again go home happy and raise their earnings estimate for the next quarter. But, this will not take place until Intel loses five or six dollars in early trading after they report earnings. I have a pretty good idea why they do things this way. Andy Bryant is really part of the Andy Grove culture. Andy Grove admits to paranoia. Not only that, but he believed that the company had to be paranoid to survive. It took incredible energy and drive for Andy Grove to bring Intel to its present state of success. Andy Grove was indeed the right person for Intel at that point in Intel's history. No one else, IMO, could have done with Intel what Andy Grove did. But, now things are different. Craig Barrett is the right man for the top job at Intel. However, he needs to do things completely his way. He has to get rid of those that served Intel well in the past, but who are overstaying their usefulness. Andy Bryant should gracefully step down and take a well deserved retirement. Mary