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: f.simons who wrote (120648)	7/20/2000 10:52:52 AM
From: crazyoldman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573135

Hello f.Simons Re: How do you figure? Adding in taxes paid? That's not the issue. In Q1 AMD had guided analysts that Q2 would not be subject to taxes. The analysts then made their estimates on that basis. What the "Droids" are saying is that it's invalid to compare $1.14 untaxed estimate to $1.21 actual taxed. One may compare $1.14 untaxed estimate against $1.51 untaxed actual, or one may compare $.91 taxed estimate vs $1.21. It is invalid to compare a $1.14 untaxed estimate to $1.21 taxed actual. Intel, having paid taxes as long as can be remembered, has the analysts giving their estimates and Intel reporting their earnings on a taxed basis. Both numbers are on a taxed basis. Kindest regards, CrazyMan

To: f.simons who wrote (120648)	7/20/2000 12:19:09 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573135

Re: "NEVER ONCE did anyone agree with me" Better get used to it Frank. The rules here change depending on who's posting. EP

To: f.simons who wrote (120648)	7/20/2000 12:21:22 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 1573135

Frank, re:<I have posted here several times about adding in Intel taxes back when AMD was paying none> Frank, I would have agreed with that when comparing AMD earnings to Intel earnings. But the article I was responding to was comparing AMD's earnings to AMD's estimates, so the tax rates should be the same in both or it is comparing apples to oranges. But I agree, when comparing AMD to Intel for the purposes of relative valuation of their stocks, we should compare them on a taxed basis. In fact, I'll go further -- AMD's earnings compared to Intel's were really AMD Operating Income = (250.2/176.2)0.69 = $0.98/share (31% tax rate) AMD Net Income = (258.9/176.2)0.69 = $1.01 (31% tax rate) Intel Operating Income = (2408/3502)0.69 = $0.47 (31% tax rate) Intel Net Income = (4749/3502)0.69 = $0.94/share (31% tax rate) I like the comparison. No matter how you slice it or dice it, AMD is making more money than Intel. On a cash basis the comparison is even more unconfortable for the Intelabee: Intel's depreciation for its equipment is only 61% of its actual capital expenditures. This is negative cash flow. AMD's depreciation is 92% of its actual capital expenditures. The reason for Intel's low depreciation is that their capital spending has been very weak in the last 5 years. To their credit, they boosted capital spending 25% over the past year and are now spending 15% of sales for capital spending vs. AMD's 14%. Frank, were you aware that Intel Capital's portfolio value dropped from 10.8 billion (Q1 report) to 7.5 billion. GO CHECK IT OUT YOURSELF! That means Intel's portfolio profits are GOING UP IN SMOKE. They "only" took 2.14 billion in gains, but their portfolio DROPPED in value by 3.3 billion! At that rate the entire portfolio will be worthless in 29 weeks and 3 days from July 1. That date is January 23, 2001. Petz

To: f.simons who wrote (120648)	7/20/2000 12:25:54 PM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 1573135

Frank, The quibble isn't over the $1.21, rather it is over the $1.14. Had the analysts done their calculations properly, that would have been more like $0.84. Scumbria