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.
Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (49410)2/27/2001 5:47:23 AM
From: Bong Lewis  Respond to of 77399
 
jacob, if you could use any fundamental metric to sell
at the peak (during a bull market), then finding absolute
botom (during a bear market) is possible. However, pe, p/s, etc. are not like 1 + 1 = 2, so during a bull market
high pe stocks keep going higher, and in a bear market low
PE stocks keep going lower; therefore, people often sold
too early or bought too soon.

if you were trading a stock, timing absolute bottom could be a good idea. if you were investing in a stock, you may look at a more reasonable bottom (using pe, p/s, charting, e.g.).
to me management and companies niche are most important
when i think of investing in a company; otherwise, i will not buy it regardless how cheap it is.

the question is " do you think csco is a good investment
in 5 years or it will be double, tripple ... from here?"
if yes, then even at 40 still a good buy. if not, it would
be a sell.

an example, lu at 50 was a bottom, then 40, 30, 20 then
12. WCOM also an example. NT is next.



To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (49410)2/27/2001 10:51:08 AM
From: Paul Shread  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 77399
 
FY 7/01 estimates are now .68, so they continue to decline; could give stock a downside as far as 20 1/2.

What I like best about CSCO is what a lot of people don't like: their dependence on acquisition. They understand that they will never be able to keep up with the pace of technological change, so they buy what they need. That makes them less vulnerable to disruption than most tech companies, IMHO. Wouldn't mind others' thoughts on this.