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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Saturn V who wrote (121193)	12/7/2000 5:20:47 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

In any case Craig should not have repeated the old guidance until this issue was sorted out. Is there a legal liability in this case ? Exactly what he should do. It was the best guess then and it is the best guess available until there is a new guess. Remember, this is not Oregon blowing up in an A-bomb attach, this is MAYBE half a day's sales.

To: Saturn V who wrote (121193)	12/7/2000 5:21:44 PM
From: maui_dude	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Saturn V, Re : "In any case Craig should not have repeated the old guidance until this issue was sorted out." Are you certain he did that ? i thought he just said that Intel will have the best quarter ever. Did not reiterate the guidance. However, I agree with you in principle. Barrett should have kept quiet. Any idea what Andy Bryant said today. Maui.

To: Saturn V who wrote (121193)	12/7/2000 5:24:12 PM
From: Hightechhooper	Respond to of 186894

Thank god that is over with. I wish they would have done it $5 ago!!! Now one more big short term bomb to avoid and that is Fucking Joe Osha (who was just on CNBC saying how this is way worse than even he expected) and Drew Peckerhead. They will both play the price war card for Q1 and try to scare as many people as possible out of the stock. Then they will upgrade at the first sign the economy is picking up. If they take their shot and no one reacts in the shortrun we will be safe until earnings in january. Then it will depend on the guidance for Q1. Well, now we know why Paul left us...

To: Saturn V who wrote (121193)	12/8/2000 12:12:38 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE: "In any case Craig should not have repeated the old guidance until this issue was sorted out. Is there a legal liability in this case ? " -------------------------- Saturn, Barrett may have earned himself a muzzle award, but there is certainly no legal liability. While certainly frustrating for investors, like you and me, he specifically said, "currently" on an interview that was a couple of days old and I believe Duke of Url said the miss was about 1/2 days worth of sales. No liability there. When Barrett's out of town, I would imagine all he can say is what his CFO had last told him in an update. Until Barrett's CFO updates his guidance, Barrett has to say it's the same. The CFO is charge of guidance, not the CEO. Someone on the thread had suggested that Barrett should have cancelled the interview. I would guess that canceling an interview with the press only days after Apple warns would just send the shivers down the Analysts back and create even more problems than conducting business as usual. The only legitimate issue with Barrett was his earlier comment a few months ago when he said "strong demand" without making it clear if he was talking about LT demand. No liability there either, but certainly annoying. However, I noticed he's now making it clearer by saying "long-term". He's learning. However, regarding your comment/issue, I think the issue is Andy B, not Barrett. I would bet that Andy B may need to speed it up a bit - speed up his press releases and think a tad more like a PR person on these kinds of issues, rather than a CFO. Maybe they should assign a strong-minded PR person to Andy B. I don't think the CEO should be a trader, focused on the short-term, I'd prefer the CEO to focus 99% on the long-term. However, I do think the CEO is responsible for making sure someone else is responsible for coordinating the communications of the short-term issues faster than what they are currently doing. I noticed the stock dropped right before this was announced, and even Yahoo posters knew about it for awhile I read on SI, and I believe Paul sensed it awhile ago, so clearly there was some lag time in issuing this press release that shouldn't have been there IMHO. From your post is the following: **THE FOLLOWING IS AN UNOFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT.** BLOOMBERG L.P. DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF THIS TRANSCRIPT LINUS CHUA: I think you're looking at about 48% increase. CRAIG BARRETT: That's our guidance at the current time. LINUS CHUA: how comfortable are you with the outlook for PC sales? People are talking about slower sales in just about every region CRAIG BARRETT: Well, I tend to look at this more on a longer- term basis rather than on a week-to week or a month-to-month basis. LINUS CHUA: Okay. Can you give us an outlook for your company...a warning, what can you do to assure that that will not happen again? CRAIG BARRETT: Well, there's nothing I can assure that it won't happen again. We're somewhat at the mercy of the marketplace and this marketplace moves very rapidly. ... It's very difficult for us to forecast those things