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: Northern Cougar who wrote (7981)	10/30/2000 4:49:12 PM
From: gbh	Respond to of 14638

Actually, a good portion of this growth is already behind us. The number for 2000 is $7.7B. So for the 4 years from 2000 to 2004, (what the market cares about going forward, the CAGR is about 36%. I would say this "slowing" is very consistent with what carriers are saying.

To: Northern Cougar who wrote (7981)	10/30/2000 9:37:01 PM
From: WiseGuy	Respond to of 14638

Tech stocks have been given an unfair amount of attention lately. It is time to put the microscope in other areas such as the financials and brokerage firms and analyze THEIR growth rates. What we will find is that these financial and brokerage firms sport lower PE, but much lower growth rate. Thus, their projected PEG would actually be higher than many tech stocks. The fact that these tech stocks have high PE's really don't mean anything if you don't take their growth rate into account. Higher PE does not necessarily mean the stock is expensive. A stock with a PE of 40 but growing at 40% is not expensive. A stock with a PE of 100 but growing at 100% is not expensive. PEG have to be looked at to determine whether stocks are expensive or not. Frankly, many tech stocks now have quite low PEG's. Sorry for not sounding connected..just jotting what comes to mind.