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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (15295)	10/20/2000 5:12:01 PM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: "Kumar said he never expected Intel to drop lower than the low sixties high fifties. Now at 37 he's sell the rallies? He also said AMD was roadkill. Kumar is just getting jerked around and collecting a big salary for it. The Analysts will be even more useless than teats on a boar now that FD has been passed...albeit they may be more dangerous for a while as they try to read CEO's facial expressions to get earnings clues." Jim, why are you so charitable towards this guy kumaR? He deserves some real criticism...which will, no doubt, come in due course. Patient Regards, DARBES

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (15295)	10/20/2000 6:51:46 PM
From: quasar_1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The Swami Sez... AMD had very good earnings. Seems to me it should have held up better than most. It hasn't. Many stocks with good earnings got floored. This is bear market (or correction) psychology. Once again that points more to 'market effect' than a fundamental reality. Now just a week later stocks report good earnings and are rewarded (SDLI, MSFT). What changed? As of today's close AMD is about 6 points higher than its recent intraday low. Does any of this tell us anything that can make us money post facto? Do many realize that over 90% of all S&P stocks met or beat their earnings expectations? Do you hear that on the news, on CNBC? No. That is because the popular media follows price just as investors do. With the way the market got annihilated you would think 90% missed their estimates. If the market looks forward, than the March sell off incorrectly predicted the strong earnings we have this quarter (6 months later). On the other hand it's impossible break out just how much is due to Mhz...and P4. I agree. I have already stated that I believe it is poorly correlated to say the best. OK how else do you explain the markets factoring in a recession next year while the economy is STILL accelerating? The markets do this all the time. Where was the recession after the '87 crash? How about the '98 sell off? The market has predicted 10 out of the last 5 recessions. If you want to try to predict a recession you have a much better chance looking at money supply or credit expansion/loan demand. Even then it is a crap shoot. Markets aren't predictive, they are reactive. Anticipation and perception are the only things that can explain the markets, IMHO. I totally agree. But the fallacy lies in thinking that the markets are anticipating fundamental reality. They reflect supply and demand and anticipate future prices. This is the price begets price or momentum model of markets. This ties market far more toward psychology than reality. The tulip craze, the South Sea Island bubble, the Railroad stock craze, the Biotech craze, the Internet craze...where was the market's predictive nature here. The market priced these items inefficiently in terms of the reality, but very efficiently in terms of the demand supply equation of the asset itself. The only thing predictable was fear and greed. So what is the herd mentality reacting to? That prices are going down. This generates fear of financial loss. This is a fundamental animal response. On the upside greed becomes fear of 'missing the profit'. This is why investors chase price at the top and dump (capitulate) at the bottom. Markets tend to lead or get faked out. Markets are not predictive. They are clearing mechanisms for supply and demand. That is all. Over very long periods of time the best you can say is that the average clearing price reflects some notion of real value to the market participants. But over a very long period of time we're all dead... Kumar said he never expected Intel to drop lower than the low sixties high fifties. Now at 37 he's sell the rallies? He also said AMD was roadkill. Kumar is just getting jerked around and collecting a big salary for it. The Analysts will be even more useless than teats on a boar now that FD has been passed...albeit they may be more dangerous for a while as they try to read CEO's facial expressions to get earnings clues. You are making my point. My point in my reference to Kumar was to show how 'experts' are as wrong as anyone else. I agree with you. If the people paid handsomely to predict can't get it right (the supposed 'smart money') than how can the market in toto be predictive. In fact I could just as easily assert that there is more evidence that the market is predictably wrong, especially at extremes. All we can ever tell is supply/demand state (money flow) at the margin. There is nothing predictive in this study. But at least we know where we are. That is more than you can say for most of the other 'tea leave reading' that passes for 'analysis'. quasar