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: John Hull who wrote (103318)	5/11/2000 12:57:00 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 186894

FUD alert! Have you seen pauL? Make it so, Mysef

To: John Hull who wrote (103318)	5/11/2000 2:28:00 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear John: Most analysis by those who publish is criticized by those who do not put theirs out to view. IMHO, there will be no semi down turn. Intel will fare worse in the future than those with rosy glasses that everyone seems to have on. Thus, it seems to hold up better than the news would currently indicate. If their reputation is lost or is downgraded, the premium (since the news is worse than the stock price would indicate) would be reduced. This means that Intel will trade at a much lower PE (forward) than now. Probably like around 20 (this level depends on how much its reputation suffers) yielding a stock price of around $50. Now since the stock is $113 this means that the reputation on Intel is allowing the stock to trade at a multiple of 2.26 over a no reputation. Although a bad reputation can even cause a company to be worth less than book (around $9.76). AMD is at a PE (Forward) of around 18. Does your analysis include overhead? Like stock options, other losing divisions, etc? Most analyses of Intel I have seen do not take these into account. If you take out the Computation Group, Intel lost $400M in the last quarter. I believe this includes the division that manufactures flash. This is what their statements to the SEC read for the last quarter (just take the overall amounts and subtract one time gains, losses and the CPU div). So in any CPU downturn, even if CPU makes almost $400M, Intel starts having losses. What would they be worth then? AMD was considered to be worth $16 at last downturn and their book value is $13.31 (per share). Thus in a large downturn in the CPU group only, letting flash and all other groups alone, AMD would be worth per share more than Intel. Intel better hope that the CPU market does not tank. Pete

To: John Hull who wrote (103318)	5/11/2000 4:18:00 PM
From: greg s	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

John, re: A great example of why putting social security investment decisions back into the hands of the individual taxpayers may not be a universally good idea Don't judge all investors by mssr. pgerassi's comments <VBG>! Some of us (I'm sure, including you) could do very well managing our own soc. sec. accounts. Hope you are doing well. Regards, Greg.

To: John Hull who wrote (103318)	5/11/2000 6:07:00 PM
From: Mani1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

John re <<amazing analysis. A great example of why putting social security investment decisions back into the hands of the individual taxpayers may not be a universally good idea...I applaud your attempt, but suggest that there may be a few flaws in your reasoning>> If there is point you do not agree with point it out. What is the "flaw" in Pete's reasoning? If you do not have the time to deal with it just let it go, criticizing and demeaning him in such a condescending manner is very cowardly. I found his argument very valid. And I have no idea what your logical argument is, assuming you have one. Mani