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 : Nortel Networks (NT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave Gore who wrote (7659)	10/25/2000 8:39:27 PM
From: SJS	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14638

When you brought home your report card, and it had mostly A's and 1 or 2 B+'s on it, and you gave guidance that you would get all A's, would your folks be dissapointed you missed? So here's the point. If these analysts expected the optical increase to be 130%, and NT didn't re-guide that down to a more reasonable number, then they were surprised. They don't like surprises, even with explanations. Steve PS: Pisani (CNBC) said that the NT booth was right behind where he was broadcasting from this morning, and while orderly, people were pushing in and shouting more than he can ever remember. It was more like the bond or commodity pits than the NYSE floor. Remember "Trading Places"?

To: Dave Gore who wrote (7659)	10/25/2000 9:02:07 PM
From: OrionX	Respond to of 14638

Dave, My sentiments exactly regarding the analysts. Now, I wonder where the stock would've traded and closed today had yesterday's AH trades not dropped though such a large void. I don't see how anyone can ever convince me that all is normal irrational trading when stocks fall through a void as large as we've seen take place on many stocks without someone somehow working the bid/ask with much smaller volumes than the regular session. Would these large stock price voids exist had the AH market been non-existent?

To: Dave Gore who wrote (7659)	10/25/2000 9:36:08 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14638

<<When you think about it, there is no reason ANY company's stock price should be penalized for ONLY growing revenues by 90% or earnings by 40% going forward.>> When you think about it, did NT really deserve a Pe ratio over 130? Dave, the market goes to extremes. They love ya when you're good, and boy do they hate you when you're just not great! <<We used to think that a company that grew by 10% a quarter was doing phenomenally well. What happened? >> And we'd award that co a big fat trailing pe ratio of 22 and a ps ratio of 2.5. Victor