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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Engel who wrote (132505)	4/16/2001 4:38:57 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

RE:"Looks like those inventory rumours are true. Look for a blood bath tomorrow" How bad, oh great one? Jim PS:I don't think it will be that bad...this wasn't that unexpected... Intel could make 22 though...

To: Paul Engel who wrote (132505)	4/16/2001 4:53:40 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Paul, Thanks to you and everyone else who sent input to SI admin. I appreciate the effort, and I think it made a difference. Scumbria

To: Paul Engel who wrote (132505)	4/16/2001 5:18:19 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Paul and Thread, RE: "down approximately 30 percent sequentially from fiscal second quarter, which was $6.7 billion. The Company expects to be profitable for the third quarter, with pro-forma earnings per share expected to be in the very low, single-digit range" ----------- Paul, thank you for the article. I'm surprised CSCO could even make a profit for the quarter - sounds like they just squeezed by. Telco market is a blood bath. I hope their lovely joy doesn't spread to us like a bad cold in the office. This market, or more specifically, quarter-ends where we don't know which way the wind is blowing and questions like ("is it going to go up?", "is it going to go down?", "is it really so bad that it will dump?", "or is the bad less than expected so it will jump?", "how bad is it?"), such thoughts were beginning to make me nervous because my threshold of comfort stops below $25 to $20 range, as I had mentioned last year when INTC was around $70 and weren't those the Happy stock Days? Too bad I didn't have protective puts back then. Well, short-term protective puts were placed on 80% of my INTC holdings today. Strike $25 for about $.38 - .40/share (the cost on Friday would have been $.35/share, so I missed the good price). But the puts increased in value 2.4Xs since this purchase was transacted (not the shares of course, so this increase is small, though it may sound nice). The cost of the protective put was small. So small, that I'm thinking of doing this for every quarter. The real gain this cost brings, is in the protection of the underlying shares. I think I may consider doing this for every quarter end. I can never guess INTC's up/down ST behavior and a protective put reduces these concerns around a quarter-end, when the stock is hovering over my threshold of comfort. Do you folks ever do this? I think it might be a good strategy - the sways seem to happen around the quarter-end and one never knows which way the wind is going to blow, and the cost for ST protection isn't too high, that this seems to be the right thing to do for every quarter-end. It seems to have worked this time. But I'm wondering if anyone has had any bad experiences with them (i.e. too many quarters where money was tossed out just for this protection that wasn't needed?). Maybe the strategy is to use this for quarter-ends in bear markets like this market, or in a bull market after the valuation has increased beyond a certain PE threshold (but what would that number be?). The Thread's thoughts on when to use these? Good luck to everyone. I hope CSCO's cold doesn't spread. $2.5B is a lot of inventory and dough. How many chips inside that inventory and who holds the bag? I doubt Intel. I wonder how CSCO's available cash is going to be impacted in future quarters now that its stock isn't as valuable for doing its business? Sounds like it could take Cisco a year or so, to get better. Regards, Amy J

To: Paul Engel who wrote (132505)	4/17/2001 12:46:36 AM
From: The Duke of URL©	Respond to of 186894

Cisco has been riding the Pooling of Interests rocket for a least three years now, that I have paid any attention. When Cisco has acquired companies with the stock of Cisco, they characteristically paid what some might have considered to be excess value. But in good times, Cisco didn't care. THE COST OF THE ACQUISTION did not appear on the income statement. It was, in a sense, money for nothing. The new income of the newly acquired company would be reflected in current earnings but the "cost" of that income simply was not. This works very well when income is going up rapidly, but it tends to be "bothersome" when that income starts to decline. Intel does not do this, generally speaking, and its core stock holders don't go for the dilution that cisco occasioned and are not, generally speaking, going to relate Cisco's problems to Intel. That is of course not to say that the daytraders and the hedge funds wont flop around for a couple of days.