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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kirk © who wrote (38628)	10/24/2000 2:01:31 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

"we should have said warm popcorn" The amazing thing in this market is that even when misinformation is corrected the damage to the stock or sector does not repair easily. Usually it gets worse as the lie/mis-statement becomes much repeated and is invariably taken as fact.

To: Kirk © who wrote (38628)	10/24/2000 3:09:09 PM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 70976

Kirk, I bet SJMN got tons of e-mail about that mistake. Of course if you read their whole article, you would have spotted the mistake - unless you flunked math. G.

To: Kirk © who wrote (38628)	10/24/2000 3:29:12 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

CNBC just said: "KLAC and AMAT getting taken down today, because the Book-To-Bill came out, and it was a negative number, which was a bit disappointing." Now, let's see.....in order to have a negative ratio, the numerator or denominator has to be negative. Was it bookings or billings that were negative? That is, were there net cancellations of orders, or did the semi-equips pay the semi companies to take their equipment? Of course, if both of those things happened, you'd end up with a positive BTB. I could give them the benefit of the doubt, and say they meant "negative" in an emotional, not a mathematical, sense.