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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tommaso who wrote (929)	3/4/2001 12:07:55 PM
From: herenow_2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

The Sunday NY Times article makes the point that investors are accustomed to U or V shaped recoveries. Japan is living through an L market. That's my fear and argued much more knowledgeably by Fleckenstien. I just don't know and have more cash now than in the last 5 years. If I truly thought we were on a quick recovery path I could nibble at AMAT in the low 40s but my gut says it's still way too high. I'm looking for 35 and below entry based on lows of previous cycles. I may miss it. Anyone buying AMAT here has much more faith in the market than I do. I'm waiting for a wash out in the semi equip. stocks, but Briefing Article or no Briefing, they still look too high.

To: Tommaso who wrote (929)	3/4/2001 6:30:53 PM
From: kollmhn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Tommaso- I read the NYTimes piece, too, and all I can say is that the analysts were nothing less than totally irresponsible in making their forecasts. I know that the forecasts at MWD were made by taking 10 year revenue forecasts and discounting back to present value at 35%. Well, who can argue with a 35% PV rate? No one! Who can argue with a 10 year revenue forecast? EVERYONE. Hell, these new companies haven't been in business more than months or a couple years and they are in sector where change is constant. How can anyone even deign to offer up a wild assed guess on revenues in 10 years?? Meeker said that 90% of the companies wouldn't even be in business in a few years (yes, Blodgett said 75%, too). So, she can tell us which ones will be and which ones won't???? And..... if she can't do THAT, how the Hell can she begin to estimate revenues?? As the article says (now that it's far too late) it was all built on fantasy, not financials. I think the Meekers and the Blodgetts have done the financial industry a huge DISSERVICE and have caused countless unsophisticates to believe there really is a pot of gold with their name on it, at the end of the investing rainbow.