SI
SI
discoversearch

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: unclewest who wrote (14762)1/9/2000 9:34:00 PM
From: Peter Sherman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
who said Q P/E is 541 - you must be overdosing on AOL or yahoo boards - FY2000 trailing on Q is 150 over 1.25 = about 120



To: unclewest who wrote (14762)1/9/2000 9:54:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 54805
 
Unc, Gorilla's don't need to have a market cap of >$10B.
That's an arbitrary screen I imposed for inclusion in the GKI.
The thread founders favored established Gorillas - Silverbacks as it were.
They are the safest bet in the high tech investing Universe.
Dancelot, Merlin, Galahad and I are older people, with short investing windows.
Youngsters like you and Cha2 have time to recover if you adopt early and
lose. We don't, so we limit our investments to sure things.

Gorillahood has to do with things like barriers to entry, high switching
costs, Tornado markets, value chains, etc. Conceivably a $100M company could
be a Gorilla. But it would be a little, bitty Gorilla that would be less than a
mouthful for one of their big brothers.

Comparing Q and Cree's p&l's doesn't work. It was the patent portfolio on
cdma that made Q special - a potential monopoly. We knew/prayed the gross
margins would follow. The patents were that powerful. Thus far we know that
cree has some patents, but have no idea if they control key processes that would
constitute a major barrier to the competition.

Don't expect us to get enchanted with cree until that essential piece
of the success equation is clarified. Until then, I will characterize them
as a Snowball worth watching, but nothing more than that.

uf



To: unclewest who wrote (14762)1/9/2000 10:47:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley  Respond to of 54805
 
my dear, dear unclewest,

I am so tired of telling people that the PE should be based on EPS excluding one-time accounting events that I'm not going to tell you the correct PE for Qualcomm. But it is NOT 541. Qualcomm's true PE is a stiff one that reflects increasing revenues and increasing profit margins, but saying it is 541 doesn't come close to passing the laugh test.

Ok. Now I feel better. :)

--Mike Buckley


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News