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 : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen who wrote (46564)	4/15/2000 9:51:00 PM
From: LTK007	Respond to of 99985

i like your ramblings Stephen,excellent post.max

To: Stephen who wrote (46564)	4/16/2000 12:40:00 AM
From: Stephen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

I forgot to mention in my last post that my charts on the tech 'leaders' ... CSCO, INTC, DELL, IBM, SUNW, EMC et al .. only show a continued downtrend with roonm to go ... We all have our own favourite indicators ... but RSI, Stochs & MACD are what I use ... and I don't see anything immediately bullish. Also, IBM is expected to show 2% yr on yr revenue growth when it reports ... INTC should be okay (for a change).. but nothing stellar ... EMC will meet or beat by 1 penny ... but ALWAYS sells off after earnings ... what the heck ... I assume everyone catches my drift. I think this story has a ways to run ... and I will be as nimble as I can be given the awful time lag of fills for limit orders !! Stephen

To: Stephen who wrote (46564)	4/16/2000 2:01:00 AM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

Of course the market's changing. It just did. We just crashed. Let me give you a few examples. CIEN from 210 to 90. CMGI from 200 to 52. ETYS from 80 to 5. Get the drift? We're already corrected on the most speculative stocks. The market has also balanced itself Dow Vs. Naz. Now we can go forward on real valuations which I appreciate being a value investors myself, tech value that is. Right now I LOVE UIS at 20, COMS at 40, IBM at 105, CPQ at 24, CMGI at 50, WCOm at 38, etc. etc. Can't go wrong here. Lucky if you even get these prices again. I bought last thing Friday to make saure I got these ridiculous prices. All of these companies are rock solid. If you want more spec ESHR at 6, LOR at 8, FATB at 6. Jeez loueeze are these winners cheap. The buying op of the year. I also like retailers here. Very very cheap. ANF at 12? - This has got to turn around - and fast.

To: Stephen who wrote (46564)	4/16/2000 6:04:00 AM
From: Adam Weiner	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 99985

Speaking of a radical change, I've been building a working theory this weekend on how the fundamentals of techs might be affected by a sustained market downturn. I think many of the bulls in this market are neglecting to realize the impact a falling equities market can have on tech companys' businesses. The last five years of Nasdaq's astonishing gains have created an immense amount of "meta" demand for the tech industry. By "meta" I mean demand not from companies producing end-chain goods and services as part of their continued acceptance and integration of IT, but instead demand created by the techs themselves, buying and selling to each other in a virtuous cycle that lifted expectations and created a demand spiral that reached into the stratosphere. I can't quantify the level of this meta demand, but you need only look at the thousands of tech companies in existence today that weren't around five years ago to get an idea of where I'm coming from. In a sense, tech has become an economy in of itself. If recent events do portend the bursting of the bubble, we're about to see this demand spiral unwind into a plank - and it's demand that will be walking off the end, taking with it the fortunes, profits, and sometimes even survival of tech outfits held near and dear to the many disciples of the "new economy". At the very least, it will foster in a new age of combine-or-die consolidation hitherto unseen. Why consolidation? Because there are simply too many techs selling too-similar of technologies to survive an IT spending shakedown. A slowing economy can't support the noise and redundant overhead that factors into the price of the hyper-competitive products in today's tech marketplace. This is esp. true when one considers the increased labor costs that will result from employees demanding wage increases in lieu of option grants. The technologies may not seem so similar now, but in the face of a consolidating IT budget, companies become less concerned about one-upping their compeititor's IT dept with Product A's 1030 bells/whistles vs. Product B's 1025 bells/whistles. Instead, they become more price and brand sensitive in an attempt to reduce the perceived risks of their purchases. Then again, if tech can continue to produce the productivity gains currently attributed to it, maybe the entire tech industry will become immune to business cycles. Perhaps tech will become even stronger in the face of a slowing economy as companies look toward technology as their sole savior of competitive advantage and profit margins. Does anyone know of precedents in past markets that support such a possibility?