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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lone Star who wrote (36873)	8/18/2000 11:30:27 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

The longer one's perspective is, the more the "downturns" look like only bumps on the great wealth creator that AMAT is. quote.yahoo.com BK

To: Lone Star who wrote (36873)	8/18/2000 12:16:05 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

L.S., Those who have followed Cary's recommendations have prospered significantly. Even though I hold a sharply different view from Cary, I'd be reluctant to declare that he is flat out wrong. He has usually been flat out right. That said, I've seen no evidence that Cary is reflecting anything but a set of quantitative analyses in his posts. ... and even those analyses seem to be somewhat suspect looking only at the sector's and the stocks' past history. I would be more inclined to give Cary more credit if he could explain what adjustments he made for: Lower inflation and inflation outlook than prior cycles; Higher productivity growth and outlook for its growth than prior cycles; Higher % of chips in Gross Global Product(if there is such an animal) than prior cycles; Higher probability of sustained growth in the use of chip equipment; Clearer view of technology and capacity drivers for the sector than prior cycles; [e.g. shrinks, demand, copper, 300mm, Low K dielectrics, CMP, Fab automation, ...] All of the above present an argument that this cycle will last longer, grow faster, and be more profitable than prior cycles. And if Cary or anyone else could clearly articulate the argument for throwing out these factors, I'd join him in the rush to sell my positions. And I don't expect to be selling much within the next year or so. FWIW, Ian.

To: Lone Star who wrote (36873)	8/18/2000 12:47:52 PM
From: Kirk ©	Respond to of 70976

I agree. Not about Cary being flat out wrong, but that a buy and hold probably beats 95% of the traders when you add in taxes and such. I like to take a bit off the table on peaks or when we break into significant new highs. I took 150% of my original investment out at $69 (split adjusted) in Jan after an 8x gain and I plan to take some out now and then as "dividends" that I can use to diversify or buy toys with. I have not decided what price point will be at, perhaps $120, and I really don't worry too much if that price comes next week or in 2 or 3 years. I am pretty confident we will get that reasonable gain since AMAT is the leader is an industry with a CAGR of 30% or so and its valuation on a PEG basis makes it a value stock. Kirk