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: Gottfried who wrote (37118)	9/1/2000 5:20:49 PM
From: shoe	Respond to of 70976

Thanks, Gottfried, I sure appreciate your charts. paula Looking earlier in the chart, I thought I saw an odd phenomenon of the price heading down as the backlog went up and then moving up again after the backlog hit bottom. Curious.

To: Gottfried who wrote (37118)	9/2/2000 5:17:35 PM
From: Pink Minion	Respond to of 70976

That means shipments [or billings] should remain strong, even if new orders did not accelerate, because Applied can fill the backlogged orders. But the backlog can get pushed out and eventually canceled, which is what always happens at the top. Not saying we're at the top.

To: Gottfried who wrote (37118)	9/2/2000 10:52:26 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 70976

Tonight on MarketWeek(I don't know why I turn it on), they had a piece on EXDS, a web-hosting provider. After the piece by Maria they had an analyst who was gushing over the company and the stock. I knew little of EXDS, except for the fact that 26 brokerages had a Strong Buy and 5 had a Buy(courtesy of CNBC). They go out of their way to provide this data yet never mentioned any EPS estimates. When I looked up the basic research on this one I found that this $66 company was expected to lose money until possibly making some in Q4FY01. Even then, the current high estimate for Q4FY01 is only .04/share with the lowest being a loss of .65/share!!!! On top of this, it was mentioned in the piece that the datacenters may have an overcapacity problem sometime in 2002. Call me crazy, but this business(which sounds cyclical like AMAT), is trading not far from where AMAT is(in price) yet may not have any earnings until 2002. Yet concern over overcapacity is not a concern because it is in a hot sector. When the charts look really ugly in the equipment sector nobody cares and everyone of the analysts says "stay away." When the fundamentals improve, the end is near so you should not be invested in them and you should also "stay away." And no matter how much positive news comes out regarding the health of the sector, it is almost always interpreted as meaning overcapacity will be hastened, meaning the end will come even more quickly. Apparently though, these same rules do not apply to other sectors. Even though AMAT is one of the All-Time great tech names in performance, if you listened to any of the analysts or brokerage houses there would NEVER be a time to buy AMAT. I am always amazed at how the talking heads will seemingly recommend the tech stock that has done well recently. At its height, I always heard Yahoo recommended as a top pick, never mind that it was trading at 140X estimated '01 revs(just 70X now). And CSCO is always mentioned as the leader in networking(never mind that they are trading at 61X estimated EPS for FY02), yet valuation NEVER plays a part in the decision to buy, only whether they are a leader or not(and whether they have done well recently). Whatever happened to growth at a reasonable price? </rant> BK