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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 7:27:56 PM
From: Mani1	Respond to of 275872

John re <<It's sort of interesting that these guys think tax dollars, that the company doesn't get to keep, shouldn't be a part of the AMD official numbers. >> Reported earnings are all taxed. That is what is required, expected and practiced by all companies. Mani

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 7:28:16 PM
From: Eric K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

No John-- "These guys" think that AMD guided analysts to predict $1.14 based on no-taxes at the q1 conference call, and that, hence, when "calculating" surprise, AMD's numbers should be treated as blow-out rather than $.07 above consensus. -Eric

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 7:31:13 PM
From: AK2004	Respond to of 275872

John you know better than that. As I posted few min back analysts assumptions did not include taxes and hence in order to compare apples and apples....... AMD did not ask that analysts would value amd on pre-tax basis Intel on another hand...... :-)) Regards -Albert

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 7:40:05 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Respond to of 275872

John - RE: "It's sort of interesting that these guys think tax dollars, that the company doesn't get to keep, shouldn't be a part of the AMD official numbers. And they felt that Intel's investment income, that stays in the company, shouldn't have been a part of the Intel official numbers." AMD should have made a better effort to get more in sync with analysts. Analysts projected non taxed, AMD announced taxed. Andy Bryant bent over his back to get analysts to include the investment gain into earnings. AMD struck out in this case.

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 8:10:16 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

John F, re:<It's sort of interesting that these guys think tax dollars, that the company doesn't get to keep, shouldn't be a part of the AMD official numbers.> The taxes reported in an earnings report are not the same as taxes paid to Uncle Sam. I doubt very much that AMD will pay one cent up to the fourth quarter. However, AMD elected to report taxation now to reduce the shock to earnings of 0% one quarter, 31% the next. Petz

To: Road Walker who wrote (1405)	7/19/2000 9:39:55 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 275872

It's sort of interesting that these guys think tax dollars, that the company doesn't get to keep, shouldn't be a part of the AMD official numbers. And they felt that Intel's investment income, that stays in the company, shouldn't have been a part of the Intel official numbers. Tax dollars that AMD doesn't get to keep should not count as part of bottom line earnings or to compare AMD to another company. Pre-tax earnings however are useful to compare how much money AMD was bringing in compared to last quarter when they paid no taxes. Intel's investment earnings are real earnings, but selling the stock limits Intel's ability to make future gains based on that stock. If Intel wanted to keep the same ability to make future gains on its stock holdings it could buy the shares back or buy other shares with the money, but then Intel's cash postition doesn't improve by the sale. It could be argued that Intel's stock trading is profitable but this profit should not get the same P/E applied to it as Intel's core business. Good banks, trading firms, or even venture capital companies rarely have the same muliples as good semi-conductor companies. Tim