To: dwayanu who wrote (4512 ) 9/29/2000 4:32:18 PM From: Sully- Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232 Hi dwayanu, I'm wondering myself how that is a positive...... Timna was delayed, problematic & already had the SDRAM change factored in to RMBS me thinks. On it's face, the decision to drop it appears mildly negative to me. The P4 announcement was not a delay per INTC.... I believe they never announced a ship date outside of 4th qtr 2000. Per CNET, unnamed sources at boxmakers called it a delay..... approx 3 week delay..... still must agree that the ship date is going to put a crimp on holiday sales, ergo, less royalties to RMBS. Considering how battered the NAZ was again..... down 105 points today, RMBS held up rather well on fairly low volume..... off $2 13/16. The market hates uncertainty. Did AAPL change our perception of where the world economy is headed? Looking at the economic data over the last couple of weeks, it sure seems that the economy is still expanding with no significant inflation. I do not see any hard landing.... I see continuing growth. Earnings warnings so far do not appear to be larger than in the past, particularly in tech sectors. Even INTC will show growth..... it will just be less than previous estimates..... in a period when they usually are flat to down. albeit slightly lower than YOY...... last yr was compared to fairly weak earnings growth YOY, so it will be hard to match even though growth remains robust overall IMO...... me thinks earnings growth this qtr will be strong overall in techland....... & my XOM ;-) FOMC will not be raising rates. I'll defer to JW's views on that as I fully concur. I think the FOMC may go to a neutral bias Tues. So why is the NAZ down? I'll have to defer to the psychology folks cuz I don't see any significant looming disasters. Me thinks that time capsules & the trumpet calls from the houses will usher in RR's bulls before the year is out. BWDIK Ö¿Ö Tim@oof.com