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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rick who wrote (13882)	1/2/2000 7:14:00 PM
From: Rick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

When was the last time the Fed raised interest rates during an election year? All things considered is a raise in February really the sure thing everyone says? - Fred

To: Rick who wrote (13882)	1/2/2000 7:18:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

I'm not going to go through a point-by-point response to that article, as I assume many have already done that on the other thread. Instead, I'll mention the things that come immediately to mind with the assumption that since they were the thoughts that stuck, they are my most important reactions. When the author mentions AMD, I guess he's making some sort of statement that there is a company on the horizon that will damage Qualcomm as much as AMD has damaged Intel. In that case, I'd like to think that Qualcomm is limited to the same extent Intel has been limited. Gimme a break. When the author bashes a discounted cash flow analysis using estimated revenues going four years past the expiration of certain CDMA patents, he assumes the company is going to fall apart in 2006 when those patents expire. He apparently knows nothing of the power of a lead to market, the power of an established brand, or the power of a value chain. If he does know of those things, he forgot to factor them into his scenario. And when the author bashes the analyst for looking out so far, he at the same time bashes analysts for not looking far enough. If I were to write an e-mail to him (and I won't) I would ask him to publish his discounted cash flow anlysis using the assumptions he thinks are appropriate instead of simpling bashing someone else's. Frankly, I don't have the slightest idea if the analyst is anywhere near correct in his assumptions. I don't have a crystal ball. But the last thing I would do is bash an analyst who is putting forth his assumptions in a clear enough manner that others can decide their merit for themselves. --Mike Buckley