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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (9250)	2/16/2001 2:58:46 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

NOK see licenses being awarded for GSM in Brazil and translated that in higher mobile sales. 2G GSM is obsolete. Vendors are trying hard to extend GSM footprint in developing countries. And they must do so, because GSM has reached saturation in the developed world. And terminals have to be sold per kilo now. It is pre-paid in developing countries that is bringing the bacon home right now. Terminals for those markets are really downmarket. There won't be much profit in these new markets.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (9250)	2/16/2001 1:23:10 PM
From: Mark Marcellus	Respond to of 34857

So the P/E problem is pretty much unsolvable. It's going to depend on sentiment, no matter how you slice it. That's dangerous thinking. It's only unsolvable if you have a compulsion to buy wireless stocks regardless of whether they give you an adequate margin of safety. If you do that, you depend upon the kindness of strangers to keep bidding up the stock price. That's okay if you like gambling action, but not if you want to be confident that you're going to make money over the long haul. I know that the history of the past few years doesn't indicate it, but stocks do get underpriced from time to time. Nokia has been underpriced in the past, and I'm sure it will be in the future. Why not wait for this to happen? (I'm only speaking of the decision to buy, the hold decision is a separate discussion) And I do disagree about Coke and other consumer staples with pricey shares. I don't think we can forecast demand for carbonated cola beverages into decades ahead Coke has a long operating history, a dominant brand, a simple business model, and an established delivery system which is unlikely to be displaced by technological change. Coke was doing what they do now back when Nokia was selling things like raincoats, and they were doing it for decades before that. There are never guarantees, but you can predict the future for Coke with a much higher degree of confidence than you can for Nokia. Of course, in this case that just makes it more obvious that Coke is ridiculously priced. The question is, why buy anything if everything is overpriced?