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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (22490)	7/26/2000 10:51:06 PM
From: akmike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

First, I agree that some of the analysts and journalists probably have it wrong. If so, and the stock is underpriced because of that, then our remedy is to acquire more shares at a gift level. These opportunities do come along and it is more profitable to buy and capitalize on them than to analyze who or why is correct or not. SSB is down on semi-conductors because "we have passed the peak of the cycle". That prior analysis prejudiced their view of the cc. If their premise is correct and the cycle has peaked for LSI, then my purchase today (and yours, Jock) will not work out. I don't know much about the semi cycle. I do believe that LSI's fortunes are not that much related to dram. I also believe that one guy that does know about the semi cycle is Wilf Corrigan. If Wilf is accelerating a capacity expansion it isn't late innings. If Wilf states in a cc (in response to a direct question) that he sees "this cycle has legs" then this investor is believing that the visibility of LSI's customer demand extends well into 2001 and likely, beyond. That invalidates SSB's premise and creates one hell of a buying opportunity. Michael Murphy hasn't shown me that he knows all that much about semiconductor cycles. When Wilf was spot on with the construction of Gresham and the purchase of Symbios he made me a fan and a believer.