SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tony Viola who wrote (37321)9/20/2000 2:16:53 PM
From: Mark Duper  Respond to of 70976
 
Tony, something for your discussion:
Scorched Tech Stocks Now Comeback Candidates
By Jon D. Markman
Managing Editor, MSN MoneyCentral
9/20/00 1:55 PM ET


For investors pathologically in love with Nasdaq 100 stocks, the past six months have seemed like one of those science fiction movies where the monster gets so ugly and snarly you can't help but avert your eyes.

Before I explain why it's probably time to pry open those peepers again, let me be the bearer of a little bad news.

Since the market peaked this very week in March, the roll call of failure at the top of the tech ticket has had virtually no parallel in bull market history. Qualcomm (QCOM:Nasdaq - news) is down 52% through Monday, Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq - news) is down 45%, Dell (DELL:Nasdaq - news) is down 39%, Microsoft (MSFT:Nasdaq - news) is down 43%, WorldCom (WCOM:Nasdaq - news) is down 32%, Applied Materials (AMAT:Nasdaq - news) is also down 32%, JDS Uniphase (JDSU:Nasdaq - news) is down 26% and Cisco Systems (CSCO:Nasdaq - news) is down 24%.

Even in the worst years of the past decade, no rout of the big-cap techs has been as complete as the one over this six-month period. In 1994, for instance, Cisco was the worst of the tech titans -- down 34% from March 20 to Sept. 20. But Sun Microsystems (SUNW:Nasdaq - news) was down just 8% in the period, Applied Materials was actually up 1% and 3Com (COMS:Nasdaq - news) rallied from a 20% deficit to a 21% advance. No other year compares; even the Persian Gulf War year of 1990 and the Asian financial crisis year of 1998 were kinder to Nasdaq stocks than 2000 has been.

What Goes Down Must Go Up
But note what happened next in 1994 and those other bad years -- anything but a further decline. After Cisco's 1994 collapse amid an interest-rate and inflation environment much like the one we have experienced in 2000, the stock rallied 37% over the next six months -- and was up 181% 12 months later. 3Com went on to rally another 45% over the next six months and 135% over 12 months. All of the Nasdaq 100's top 10 stocks were up at least 9% from October 1994 to October 1995, with America Online (AOL:NYSE - news) the leader at a gain of 296%.
A fluke? Maybe not. I tested this hypothesis against historical market data from 1985 to 1997:

Start with a universe of the top 15 stocks in the Nasdaq. Focus on the five with the worst six-month return through Oct. 1. What happens over the next 12 months?

The answer, according to back-testing software from Q-Analytics: On average, they gained 21% over the next 12 months -- 5.7 percentage points better than the S&P 500 index. The best of the years was actually 1994, when the top five rebounding stocks were Applied Materials, Cisco, Costco (COST:Nasdaq - news), Intel (INTC:Nasdaq - news) and Novell (NOVL:Nasdaq - news). They were up 81% in aggregate, about 55 percentage points better than the broad market.

The five worst six-month performers among the biggest 15 Nasdaq stocks when I ran this screen on Monday were Qualcomm, Yahoo!, Dell, Microsoft and WorldCom. If you're inclined to follow this contrarian route to potential success over the next six months but want more stocks, take the next two from the list of infamy as well: Applied Materials and JDS Uniphase.

Now, before you value investors start feeling too smug, it's well worth noting that the five Nasdaq biggies that performed best over the same six-month period from 1985 to 1997 did much better than their delinquent brethren over the next 12 months: 36.7% on average, or 21.5 percentage points better than the broad market. This year, that fabulous five as of the end of last week were Juniper Networks (JNPR:Nasdaq - news), Sun Microsystems, Broadcom (BRCM:Nasdaq - news), Oracle (ORCL:Nasdaq - news) and Amgen (AMGN:Nasdaq - news).

Search For Strong Saplings
As we light a candle on the six-month anniversary of Nasdaq 5000 and find ourselves sooty but unsullied, let's consider that the rout may have been a good thing -- much like a fire that burns through a forest of old growth, leaving room for saplings to grow and prosper. A screen of the market's very best stocks of any size or exchange in the past six months reveals that cash has flowed to a new generation of potential blue-chips as smart money managers have reallocated risk capital from companies that were maybe a tad overvalued to ones that were not.
Who are the lovely young things that have emerged fresh and fearsome on the fallow ground? They are a ravishing list of no-names -- many from the wrong side of the tracks, which is to say, not tech and not biotech. Four are from the diversified electronics group, led by Power-One (PWER:Nasdaq - news); five are from the scientific instruments group, led by Newport (NEWP:Nasdaq - news); and four are semiconductors, led by IXYS (SYXI:Nasdaq - news). But the biggest cohorts are the oil and gas drillers, led by Swift Energy (SFY:NYSE - news), and the obscure medical laboratories and research goup, led by Laboratory Corp. (LH:NYSE - news), as well as asset management, led by Nvest (NEW:NYSE - news).

The biggest two names in the group were Integrated Device Technology (IDTI:Nasdaq - news), up 132% since the Nasdaq high in March, and CDW Computer Centers (CDWC:Nasdaq - news), up 148%. The leading biotech name in the bunch was Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX:Nasdaq - news), up 155% in the past six months.

So what happens next? Bert Dohmen, a veteran trader and newsletter publisher based in Honolulu, says he thinks the big story over the remainder of the year will be a sharp revival of interest in biotechnology. He says that the Amex Biotech index hit a record high in March, then collapsed before staging a surprise rebound to within a mitochondria's length of the old high in July. It then retreated before bouncing back again in August. Amid the technology weakness in September, it has held firm and exceeded the July high.

"I think we're going to see a powerful breakout to the upside in biotech," he said. "The intraday action in the big names has been very strong; every time they have a pullback we see new buying and multipoint spurts. That's very bullish." His favorites to play the idea are big-cap PE Biosystems (PEB:NYSE - news), mid-cap Celera Genomics (CRA:NYSE - news) and small-cap Cell Genesys (CEGE:Nasdaq - news).

Looking at the big picture, Dohmen says he believes that while technology will perform fairly well over the next six to 12 months, the market will broaden out. His thesis: Rising interest rates from mid-1998 through early 2000 led professional money managers to overweight technology in their portfolios because they're the companies least dependent on debt. But as interest rates decline, starting next year, he believes managers will trim tech to a market weighting, and the beneficiaries will be such forgotten sectors as the utilities, regional banks and real-estate investment trusts. His picks in the latter are Spieker Properties (SPK:NYSE - news) and BRE Properties (BRE:NYSE - news). Even though the utilities have already staged an electrifying run, he believes that they're just starting a two- to three-year emergence as growth stocks. Power on.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the time of publication, Jon Markman owned or controlled shares in the following equities named in this column or listed in the SuperModels portfolios: ADC Telecommunications, Amdocs, America Online, CDW Computer Centers, Cisco Systems, EMC, JDS Uniphase, Kopin, Maxygen, Microsoft, Nokia, Nortel Networks, Oracle, Qualcomm, Siebel Systems, Superconductor Technologies and Xcelera.com. He welcomes your feedback at mctsc@microsoft.com.



To: Tony Viola who wrote (37321)9/20/2000 2:18:29 PM
From: michael97123  Respond to of 70976
 
Michael Murphy said the same thing. Minimal disappointments in tech. Look at how they killed TXN today when one analyst took one thing out of context at an analysts meeting. These guys think only meeting projections or beating them by a bit is like an earnings warning. These projections are high and companies will meet and beat them. What do you want to own here gillette or Intel, a utility or Oracle, Exxon or AMAT. I am surprised that this has not been recognized yet by the experts in September. I think it is being recognized now. NAZ down 13, dow down 170. This could be the rotation back to tech that we have been waiting for.



To: Tony Viola who wrote (37321)9/20/2000 5:17:17 PM
From: Proud_Infidel  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 70976
 
Flash vendors show pricing restraint in surging market
By Will Wade
EE Times
(09/20/00, 04:11:35 PM EDT)

SAN MATEO, Calif. -- It's no surprise that the flash memory market is exploding. The astonishing growth of cellular telephones and other consumer devices couldn't happen without non-volatile memory. Flash is also emerging as a key element in the booming networking and telecommunications sectors, and the vendors are selling the chips as fast as they can make them.

Chip companies confirm that just about all of their capacity for this year is sold out, and they've already booked sales through much of next year as well. The only part of the flash market that isn't taking off like a rocket is pricing.

While prices for flash have swelled at a healthy clip since last year, several executives at flash suppliers say that they could have raised their prices even more. However, showing admirable restraint for companies in the memory segment, they have chosen instead to negotiate long-term agreements with many of their key, high-volume customers. This has kept prices reasonable and allowed the chip makers to forecast their future capacity needs with greater precision. It's a simple trade-off, they say: short-term profits for long-term stability. And if they manage to play this game skillfully, they may be able to fend off the next semiconductor downturn.

"A significant portion of the flash units shipped today are priced under long-term agreements," said Richard Wawrzyniak, senior analyst for Semico Research Corp. in Phoenix. "There is a severe shortage of flash and allocation is the rule of the day. You would think the ASPs this year would be sky-high, but they aren't."

That's not to say that flash pricing has been flat. Wawrzyniak said the average price for all flash chips sold this year is $5.26, up some 40.6 percent from last year's figure of $3.74. That gain reflects both higher prices and a different mix that saw increased shipment of the more expensive, higher density flash chips. "While the percentage gain is big, in dollar figures it's not that big," he noted. And over the next several years, that average price for flash chips should see only modest gains, increasing a projected 19% to reach $6.27 in 2004.

Over the same period, demand for flash bits is only going to increase, as Wawrzyniak's forecast calls for the total number of flash chips shipped to swell from 1.9 billion this year to 3.7 billion in 2004. But the long-term agreements are holding pricing down.

"We could have charged more for our chips," said Curt Nichols, general manager for the flash products group at Intel Corp., the leading flash vendor. Intel has more than 10 long-term sales agreements for its flash chips, including one to cell phone giant Ericsson, and Nichols said more than half of the company's total output is dedicated to these agreements. "I believe the flash industry is trying to get to a situation that allows for stable projections of both supply and pricing."

Intel is just one of many flash companies negotiating a few very large and long deals, which typically last about two to three years. Advanced Micro Devices Inc., which is part of a joint flash venture with Fujitsu and claims the number two spot in the flash market, has secured more than 20 of these deals, according to Kevin Plouse, vice president of technical marketing and business development for the company's memory group.

And Eugene Feng, director of worldwide marketing for fabless flash vendor Silicon Storage Technology Inc. in Sunnyvale, Calif., said his company has a few such agreements now, and expects to complete several more by next year. "Our goal is to have at least 50% of our output committed to LTAs," he said. "This type of deal has become a necessity for both suppliers and customers."

While the flash market is booming today, this was not always the case. The flash segment was hit just as hard as other sectors during the last semiconductor down cycle, in 1997 and 1998. With revenues down, the chip suppliers did not have the funds available to invest in fabs and increase their capacity. That is the reason for the shortage situation that the market is experiencing today.

However, when flash money started rolling in last year, the vendors began investing heavily in capacity, and those additional facilities are going to start delivering products soon. So far, this sounds just like the regular ebb and flow of the semiconductor cycle, but here is where the story diverges.

When thinking about the economics of the memory market, most people think about DRAM. In that space, memory vendors tend to price their chips as high as they can when the supply is tight, not only to sock away some profits for when the cycle heads down, but also to pay for capital investment in order to increase production capacity. In this purely commodity market, price and availability rank as some of the most important variables that can make or break a sale, which is why the vendors are so cutthroat in their pricing; a difference of pennies per chip can be huge.

"The flash market is very different," said AMD's Plouse. The main reason is that there are a wide variety of different products, rather than a few interchangeable designs. But even more important, the end applications for flash chips are seeing phenomenal growth, while the DRAM market is tied primarily to the more mature PC segment.

Flash customers need their parts, and without flash chips, they can't ship their products. And customers are not in a position to switch vendors easily, because there are so many different variables in the flash product portfolio, including density, voltage packaging, and whether the device uses the NAND or NOR architecture. They need their suppliers to keep supplying, even if the chip market heads into one of its periodical cyclical downturns, because there is no projected end in sight for growth in the cellular phone market.

"The flash and the cellular phone vendors are forging relationships that will lead to a more stable supply line," said Intel's Nichols. "If that means Intel gives up some of its ability to raise prices, that's OK. It's clear that the wild cyclical swings in the semiconductor industry are not conducive to good business practices."

So, with a more restrained approach to pricing, the chip companies are buying themselves a longer view of their customers' needs, and this allows them to better plan their own capacity expansion. In fabless SST's case, it allows them to secure better foundry terms because they can place larger orders with longer lead times, according to Feng, which keeps their costs lower. "Volatility in the market makes it hard for us to plan for the future," he said.

And it is in the future where this may all pay off. With a better view of the next several years, combined with amazing growth in cell phones and other end-use applications for flash, the segment may not fall into the trap of excess capacity leading into a downturn. According to Wawrzyniak, additional flash capacity coming on line will bring capacity almost perfectly in line with demand in 2002, and there could be a very slight oversupply through 2003. But by the following year, demand will again slightly outpace supply.

This is about the same period when some analysts expect other sectors of the chip market, notably DRAM, to start heading into an oversupply situation. "Some forecasts show that the unbelievable growth in cellular phones could well suck up all the available capacity that is coming on line," predicted Intel's Nichols.

That, combined with better long-term capacity forecasts — the by-product of long-term sales agreements — could allow the flash companies to build up only the capacity they need during that period, and avoid the oversupply situation that always leads to a downturn in other sectors.