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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (47223)	5/24/2001 3:28:21 PM
From: trilobyte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Hi Michael, very good point --people holding shares of AMAT know that the recovery was brutal in 1998. Alot just followed the btb and sold right at the bottom, then. This is probably why in this cycle investors anticipated the top by many months (top in May 2000 for stocks but only in Oct 2000 for new bookings). Now they are anticipating the bottom by many months. Nothing wrong with that. It may not be rational, but that's the game big money is playing this cycle. Too bad that this scenario seems to irritate many on this board --the more rational ones! Trilobyte

To: michael97123 who wrote (47223)	5/24/2001 5:59:25 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Respond to of 70976

Mike, '98 could turn out to be child's play compared to the current situation. Check CSCO's sales growth in '98. Look at the sales of LLTC and MXIM and the current situation. '98 was much easier to remedy, or possibly cover up, because it was a regional currency problem amenable to outside intervention. Greenspan did not give the impression that he was soiling his pants in '98. No 5, 1/2 % reductions in 4 1/2 months in '98. Also, semi-equip sales had lagged from '95 except for the SE Asian ill advised puchases in '97. Equipment sales jumped ~80% in '00 to record highs. Some of that new equipment is part of the idle capacity and some hasn't been fully ramped up yet. I wonder how you decide that you are "learning from history" when you have no quantitative measures of either '98 or '01.