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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chic_hearne who wrote (102403)	4/5/2000 7:07:00 PM
From: Mani1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578130

chic, you changed the subject. I do agree that street likes predictable and sustained earnings that is growing. You and Yougang implied that AMD's stock did not perform well on the day after Q4 earnings because they surprised the street TOO much. That, I disagree with. Also I do not have a broker, I use an online account. Mani

To: chic_hearne who wrote (102403)	4/8/2000 3:52:00 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1578130

Which would analysts rather have? Company XYZ is having a blowout quarter, they say nothing and beat estimates by $.50 a share. or Company XYZ is having a blowout quarter, they guide analysts up on two serparate occasions, then beat revised earnings by only $.10 a share. chic, There is a third option and its the one that analysts would pick hands down......blowout earnings with the necessary guidance provided by mgmt. The problem in the past is that Sanders would not play the game....he would not provide them with the guidance. And frankly I don't blame him...the guidance allows the analysts to clue in their clients before the big runup. Their clients buy in at bargain rates while we pay full price. However now I believe Sanders is providing the necessary guidance...to whit, the big runup in the stock since March. And who can blame him; I am sure he is tired of the the "near term accumulates" and price targets of $70 which result in P/E's that are 18 times earnings when Intel's is 37. ted