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 : PALM - The rebirth of Palm Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mang Cheng who wrote (4131)	3/11/2001 2:00:08 PM
From: David E. Taylor	Respond to of 6784

Mang & Thread: Looking at the institutional ownership of Palm as of 12/31/00 (data summarized on Stocksmart.com from 13f reports, some but not all of the top 50 holders checked by me from SEC filings), it appears that overall, institutional ownership of Palm decreased slightly from 65% to 61% from 9/30/00 to 12/31/00. Major changes (the first two were the only major sellers): (1) Fidelity lost its #1 position by selling 24 million shares, now holding 16 million at #4. (2) Capital Research and Management vacated the #3 spot by selling 25 million shares, now holding only 4 million at #17. (3) Janus moved into #1 spot, increasing its holding from 30 million to 37.6 million shares. (4) Lincoln Capital management was a major buyer of 10 million shares, now #2 at 23 million. (5) Putnam increased its stake by 8 million shares to 14 million, now #5. (6) Barclays (#3), Invesco (#6) and State Street (#8) were essentially unchanged at 17 million, 11.5 million and 10.6 million respectively. (7) AIM added 4 million shares to move up to #7 with 10.8 million. (8) Wellington Management shed 2.3 million shares to drop to #9 with 9.4 million. (9) Rorer Asset Management at #10 trimmed 1 million shares to 9 million. While I haven't dug in to try to find out what price Fidelity and Capital sold at (I don't really want to know that there were two funds smart enough to sell at $60+, but they may have been part of that 78 million volume spike at $25 to $30 on 12/21/00), clearly the funds that bought in or added did so at prices of at least $25 to $30/share if they bought after 12/21/00, and in the $35+ (and maybe much higher) range if they bought before those Q2 earnings. Couple that with my conclusion last fall that all the funds who got PALM via the COMS spin off in July last year paid (like many of us) at least $20 to $25/share (if not more) after backing out the COMS portion which they subsequently sold, and we have plenty of institutional company under water at our present $20 level. Does this mean that PALM is a good "valuation" buy here at $20? Many would argue we're all dumb and that PALM is still over-priced, but there are clearly plenty of institutional fund managers who disagree with them and are in PALM for a bit more than the near term. David T.

To: Mang Cheng who wrote (4131)	3/11/2001 11:57:58 PM
From: Tom R. Clarksburg	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 6784

Mang, I don't know if you are Chinese, but you can translate this article? messages.yahoo.com Someone in the Yahoo board said that Palm will announce the the signing of ACER as a new licensee and ACER will stop producing its LINUX PDA in favor of the PALM OS. Can you translate or know anyone that can? Thanks TOM