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 : Mattson Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Stewart who wrote (2058)	10/23/1999 7:22:00 PM
From: Q.	Respond to of 3661

PSR is not everything for valuing semi equips. For years, Lam was valued much more cheaply than Novellus based on sales. That's because Novellus had a better financial model with vastly superior margins. As a result, Novellus had a larger market cap, despite much smaller sales than Lam. That was true as of a couple of years ago, when I quit following the two companies closely. So far, Mattson is showing no signs of moving toward a Novellus-like financial model.

To: John Stewart who wrote (2058)	10/23/1999 8:59:00 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3661

John S, You really needed a PC. I really don't need a car. Last time I rented a car (actually a 4WD monster) was to spend a week in Whistler last winter. I'll rent again next month when I go to a wedding / reception. And I've probably taken less than a dozen taxis in the last year, excluding trips to / from the airport. So, NO, I WON'T SELL ANY SHARES next year to buy a car. If the Nov 12.5s or the Jan 12.5s get put to me, then I'll probably sell some or all of the additional shares some time during the next year or so. The core position stays put until at least the end of 2001 with my current view of this up leg. John G, Lam wasn't awarded a multiple because its margins and ROE absolutely sucked. Since Bagley / Johnson arrived, their AMAT financial discipline has been brought to bear with outstanding results. For Brad to have a 48% GM at this revenue level augurs well for MTSN's expense control, future margins as revenues ramp and a very solid ROE. His track record at NVLS may well be a good predictor for what we can expect from MTSN. Agree that we can't count our capital gains before they're realized. But I fully expect that we're all going to be very pleased during the next few years. Best wishes, Ian.