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 : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gottfried who wrote (8892)	10/22/2000 3:37:36 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Gottfried, my definition of a "cycle top" is top in the stocks of the leading companies. For the equip sector that would be AMAT and for the chips INTC. Similarly a cycle bottom is a bottom in the shares of leading companies. Of course at the time of these tops and bottoms we never know if these were the top and the bottoms. The big question is if we saw a bottom in the last two weeks. If we did, than these prices should not be breached before new 12 months highs are reached. My opinion (opinion, not "knowledge") is that we have not yet seen the bottom of the cycle (thus my opinion is also that we will not see new 12 months highs in these two before the recent lows are breached). It is my further opinion that we are at the beginning of a bear market rally in the sector, and my "best targets for both are $55 for INTC and $65 for AMAT. My model will "admit defeat", if we close above $58 on INTC and above $68 for AMAT. If that were to happen I would probably have targets like INTC and AMAT at $100 plus. Zeev

To: Gottfried who wrote (8892)	10/22/2000 4:55:21 PM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Gottfried, <The story below makes comparisons up to Q2 fool.com No market share loss then.> The story painted in that article is only partially true. Intel lost several percentage points of high-end market share to AMD from Q4'99 to Q2'00 and more in Q3'00. And, Intel has madeup some of it at the low-end by killing off VIA/Cyrix. In Q3, there is little dispute that Intel lost some more market share - this time both units and revenues. AMD unit shipments went up 10% and revenues were up by 7% Intel's units and revenues were about flat. Depending whom you ask what the total size of the market is, Intel's loss of marketshare for Q3 alone is approx 1.3-1.6%. Going forward, since that's where some of the capacity issues become relevant, Intel is likely to lose more market share before it starts gaining market share. If you look at Q4 guidance from AMD and Intel, it appears that Intel will lose one or two more percent unit market share in Q4 and significantly more in revenue share. And, I should say in general AMD has met or exceeded guidance for last 4 quarters and Intel has missed or barely made their guidance in the same period (even that saving grace was largely a result of investment gains). <Possible market share losses in flash? Mr Barrett singles out flash as a good performer in the 3Q report... >"Looking ahead, we anticipate record revenue in the fourth quarter, with growth across most of our product lines," added Barrett. "We are especially pleased with the rapid growth in our server business, our record flash business, > Yes, I say "possible" market share loss and that is not inconsistent with "record flash business". Flash market is growing rapidly and almost every player, regardless of market share position, is seeing record revenues. At the same time most are losing market share because of lack of capacity. The guys that are gaining market share in flash seem to be the DRAM guys and second tier players who couldn't sell what they wanted to when the market was not this hot. For year 2000, I expect the major US NOR flash guys (Intel, AMD and Atmel put together) to have lost a decent chunk of market share to other players. <what is your definition of "the end of the semi equipment cycle"? Is it when orders reach a top? Is it when orders reach a bottom? > For me it is when the orders reach the top (not billings but bookings) Chuck