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: GVTucker who wrote (95790)	1/12/2000 12:56:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

GV - Re: "Does INTC manipulate its numbers. Most probably yes, just like every other public company out there. But there is absolutely zero evidence that anything untoward is going on, unlike a whole host of other companies out there today." Can you elaborate by what you mean here ? It sounds like your are saying there is "good" manipulation and "bad" manipulation. Paul

To: GVTucker who wrote (95790)	1/12/2000 2:18:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

GV, thanks for that: Intel's cash flow is very apparent, and management continually answers in minute details any questions I have about the balance sheet. Intel doesn't even come close to other more aggressive but honest technology companies like CSCO, never mind the outright fraud the Fleck is inferring. I always thought Intel was a very tough competitor, but above board when it came to the books. WRT the guy you refer to, desperate people will say, well, desperate things. The entire short side of my portfolio is based upon balance sheet issues that have yet to materialize on the income statement. Usually, the issues arise from deficient cash flows combined with less than forthcoming disclosure from management. Dare I ask for any of these company names? No, that's all right, my investing partner doesn't like going short. OTOH, they should be avoided as long candidates. You'd probably rather remain mum on them though. Tony