SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Gary Ng who wrote (40765)12/13/2000 2:23:36 PM
From: Gottfried  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 70976
 
Gary, it's reasonable to assume the $6.5B for 2000 can't be repeated in 2001. No official word from Intel until January, right, Tony?

Gottfried



To: Gary Ng who wrote (40765)12/13/2000 2:24:26 PM
From: 16yearcycle  Respond to of 70976
 
yes, the writing is on the wall. I am kicking myself for not having focused here closely months ago. The easy short money has been made, and we appear to be going all the way down to the very low levels(relative values) of 1996 and 1998.

I thought we would see a shallow bottom in orders, but now I don't know. In any case, the ta says to still short, so I am doing it.



To: Gary Ng who wrote (40765)12/13/2000 2:25:15 PM
From: Tony Viola  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 70976
 
Deleted, edited version a couple posts later.



To: Gary Ng who wrote (40765)12/13/2000 2:26:56 PM
From: Tony Viola  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 70976
 
Gary, I know, but the 6.5 billion was for this year, 2000. Bryant said in the CC a couple weeks ago that he'd have capex estimates for 2001 in mid Jan. (probably at earnings CC time).

I think a writer saying something which had no number on it, is collapsing, is reaching for sensationalism. Anyway, if it "collapses" to 4 billion, that's still the second biggest ever, in my recollection.

Wonder what AMAT etc, were expecting from Intel next year.

Tony