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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Wang who wrote (26175)	10/10/2000 9:11:00 AM
From: s-words	Respond to of 436258

<< ...Given stocks like MU are already down 58 pts. and have a forward PE of 10 or 11...>> Everyone throws "forward" P/E around these days. Analyst on CNBC citing CSCO growth rate at 60%. What she doesn't say; it's due to using pooling method of accounting for acquisitions and tax benefits from paying employees with options. Core revenue growth is another matter. S.F. Chronicle has picked up on this story. sfgate.com

To: Tony Wang who wrote (26175)	10/10/2000 10:20:17 AM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 436258

<Wall ST. is now almost unanimously in your camp now. Every day, analysts seem to pick out what hasn't collapsed and do a downgrade just to get into game. Are you concerned that your peers who were on the other side of the ledger for these past years have turned around and joined you en masse? > Tony, this is fallacous... have you seen the sentiment numbers as well as the recommendation lists of the major houses?? I think you're looking at the situation through 'special goggles'. DAK

To: Tony Wang who wrote (26175)	10/10/2000 1:16:36 PM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Tony: As noted in the past, 1998 proved to be too early to be shorting an obvious (and I do mean obvious) peaking of the growth cycle in PCs/semis. Recognizing the mania was expensive. But 1999 was more than a delight and 2000 has been a ball (all on the Vaderian side of the market), so no complaints at this end. As noted over the last few days, I have cleared most short/put positions, in expectation of a "bear market bounce". I may well be totally wrong about this but I've learned not to be greedy and taking profits off the table rarely leads to bankruptcy court appearances. I'm not worried about the N.Y. analytical crowd having turned into bears, at least not yet. We have a long ways yet to fall before there will be any chance of a value-based bottom. These characters only reduce their estimates when they are forced to by events, so that their recent bearish pronouncements are merely the closing of the doors of empty barns. Actually, having very little exposure to the short side does make me very nervous at the moment, as I may well be setting myself up to totally miss the big waterfall. That said, one has to play the game as one thinks it is likely to evolve and I think the odds of a decent bounce occurring are good. I will dive back in if it does. If it doesn't I will return to the action farther on down the road. By the way, it sure wasn't "explaining the obvious" many months ago and my posts haven't changed much in content of late. (g) Best, Earlie