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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Craig Freeman who wrote (16829)	11/25/2000 3:27:10 AM
From: Craig Freeman	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 60323

The Supreme Court of the U.S. will hear not only arguments presented by the Bush campaign but also its own question(s). There are issues of fairness in dealing with military ballots. Fairness of the courts, elected bodies, etc. in responding to (and/or refusing to respond to) requests for recounts. Fairness of the courts when setting recount deadlines. Etc. Anyone who has ever been to court knows that no outcome is certain. IMHO, when all is said and done, the Supreme Court will rule that the State of Florida failed to follow its own laws and has failed in assuring the "one man, one vote" rule. They will also rule that the Legistlature of Florida has no right to make any laws that retroactively affect a Presidential election. IMHO, It is possible that the US Supreme Court will find that the State of Florida failed to meet its implied constitutional responsibilities with respect to this election and/or the appointment of electors (to the Electoral College). If so ordered, Florida's EC votes would be denied and Gore will become the next US President (by virtue of the fact that aside from FL, he won a majority of the electors -- not to mention the majority vote as well). To be honest, I don't care nearly as much about "who" wins as much as having "someone" win. Anyone who wishes to express a contrary opinion is welcome. Craig

To: Craig Freeman who wrote (16829)	11/25/2000 9:05:04 AM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Craig, There is no confidence in the market. I guess that many are still jittery given the overall market volatility since the April crash and the rallies and crashes since that time. At this point most have had enough and are shying away from stocks. Add to this the strife in the Middle East, rising oil prices, a presidential election in limbo,... We have gotten a good dose of reality and it is bitter medicine. What will it take for fund managers and institutional investors to reinvest? I have no clue, but sooner or later they will come back. Just my 2¢ Aus

To: Craig Freeman who wrote (16829)	11/25/2000 5:55:54 PM
From: lbmiller2000	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Craig, >>Expected earnings for SSTI, TSM, UUMC and SNDK remain almost unchanged. How can analysts downgrade stocks in this environmment if they have no change in earnings to offer?<< One answer is that the analysts believe that the 2001 market will have lower valuations against the same earnings. In general, this means a lower stock price against the same earnings resulting in a lower p/e. My opinion is that SNDK's valuation 'adjustment' has happening during the last couple of months and, that once the presidential election is decided and Greenspan loosen's the rein's on interest rates (in Jan'01 I predict), SNDK will make up for lost time! Keep the faith!