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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerome who wrote (41998)	2/10/2001 11:19:44 AM
From: orkrious	Respond to of 70976

Anyone that wanted to dump AMAT has had a whole week to do it.If you really believe that a stock is heading downhill why wait until the bottom of the hill has been reached? Jerome, wouldn't someone have said the exact same thing about CSCO exactly one week ago? I am not comparing the two companies. AMAT is clearly a superior value (at least to me) than CSCO. But no one who was holding CSCO a week ago thought that they would give the guidance they gave. If AMAT gives the same "absolutely no visability" guidance, wouldn't you expect a selloff? Jay

To: Jerome who wrote (41998)	2/10/2001 12:40:51 PM
From: advocatedevil	Respond to of 70976

RE: "Perhaps we should separate the semi-equips into two groups. One would be those that are having a good quarter and outlook, and those that are having much lowered expectations for the rest of the year." Jerome, Donald Wennerstrom (SI: StockTalk: Semiconductors : Wennerstrom Semi Equipment Analysis) posts some interesting lists ranking about 30 semi-equip cos by various methods: PEG, changes in earnings estimates, etc. For example: First Call estimates for the entire group dropped about 5% during the two week period ending 2/8. Subject 37144 AdvocateDevil

To: Jerome who wrote (41998)	2/10/2001 12:46:11 PM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Jerome, >To his [Eugene Kearney] expectations I would say that events dictate what the charts will look like. His theory would be that the charts will dictate what events will take place (much lower stock price).< Sure - events make charts. But it's very interesting to look at a 10 year chart and reflect that just the right events occurred over that time span to keep the LT price trend at the same slope. And, if you draw lines parallel to the trend and connecting cyclic tops, the tops end up near those lines. Same for bottoms. It's sort of like the average market return being 10% over many decades. So, not having a crystal ball, it's reasonable to bet on repetition of trends when the stock is cyclic. chart.bigcharts.com Gottfried

To: Jerome who wrote (41998)	2/10/2001 1:39:06 PM
From: 16yearcycle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Jerome, I don't want to be misunderstood and Gottfried and I are almost exactly in synch...he is just more organized, diligent, patient, understandable, and intelligent than I. Heck we already hit 34 once didn't we? It won't be hard to revisit it. I don't think whether it is 28, 32, 34 or 38 or even 42 should worry anyone. The concern has to be whether we go down and stay down for a year, and threaten to collapse into the teens.This could only happen in the event of a severe recession; I don't think the neurosis of the average investor can cause that much of a disaster. So: I expect 38, and I will cover there. I will buy 2003 30 leaps at any sign of price stability after I cover. And I will start accumulating stock then. When we hit the 30 week average, I will buy a very large position. I have been posting this since November. Gottfried and I came up with these buy, sell, and short points based on ta around that time. Why ta? Well, it just hasn't worked great to buy amat on fundamentals. Fundamentals are actually always good for amat. It's public sentiment that hammers and grows the stock. So, as I hope you can see, I think we are in buy territory and it isn't time to be too worried unless you think we are going to have a real economic meltdown(60% on the nas just wasn't enough;>(). When we hit 120 in a couple years, we should get worried again.