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.

Non-Tech : j.c.penney -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yogizuna who wrote (41)	9/9/2000 6:53:57 PM
From: Mark Adams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 111

S&P still has JCP as a four star accumulate. They also think cash flow can support the divedend, despite the recent poor earnings performance. If we get a bit more downside next week, I think I may add. I think I'm letting this energy thing get the better of me. Yes, it's the equivalent of a tax hike. So we are in an environment with higher short term rates and energy costs creating a drag on performance. Yet wasn't oil trading around $30/bbl three years ago? I don't recall people in 97 worried about high oil prices driving the world's economies into recesion then. I guess what got me was my expection of $25/bbl and the $10 difference at $35. The impact on the SE Asian economies can't help that hemisphere, and if the European group slides into recession, I don't see how Argentina and Brazil are going to absorb the slack. Barrons happened to have a couple of articles this week that touch on the impact of higher oil, but I really think we need to step back and look at how things worked in 96-97 regarding energy costs and their impact on the bottom line.