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 (47226)	5/24/2001 4:06:16 PM
From: advocatedevil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Mike, I heard someone on CNBC state that Intel came out again today, reconfirming their 7.5B capex spending plan for this year. Perhaps that's what moved AMAT higher late in the session. It may take until Christmas before that "news" no longer has any impact. AdvocateDevil

To: michael97123 who wrote (47226)	5/24/2001 4:59:07 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Intel won't budge from $7.5 billion cap spending plan but nudges up 2-GHz processor By Mark LaPedus Semiconductor Business News (05/24/01 15:29 p.m. EST) SANTA CLARA, Calif. -- During Intel Corp.'s annual shareholders meeting here today, company officials stuck to their guns and continued to insist that the chip giant would invest a record $7.5 billion in capital spending this year despite the industry's severe recession. "The only way out of a slowdown is to invest," said Craig Barrett, Intel CEO. During the shareholders meeting, Intel officials also hinted that the company has moved up its schedule to introduce a 2-GHz Pentium 4 processor in the third quarter. Currently, the fastest version of Pentium 4 is a 1.7-GHz central processing unit. The 2-GHz speed grade of Intel's 0.18-micron CPU had been scheduled for launch at the end of the year, but Intel is apparently accelerating its efforts to compete faster processors from rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. For a number of months, analysts have speculated that Intel would cut back its capital spending plans as the chip industry slipped further into its deep downturn. But the Santa Clara company said it has not cut back from its $7.5 billion target. Intel's capital spending budget last year was $6.7 billion, a 96% increase from $3.4 billion in 1999.

To: michael97123 who wrote (47226)	5/24/2001 7:07:01 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 70976

RE: " Now Cary is fighting the tape." First of all, I am insulted that you think a simple minded cliche is sufficient to characterize my behavior. Second, you are wrong. As of today, my brokerage accounts hold 57.4% stock, mostly semi-equips and CSCO, and 42.6% cash. I have been selling into strength, taking 50%+ profits on recent purchases. The 1/2 AMAT and KLAC I sold for $55 and $48, had a cost of $7.31 and $9.91, respectively. I will sell 1/2 of my ASML at ~$32. It is ~28% of my stock position and I have an average cost of $1.24. I have stated that I will maintain, at least, a 50% stock position, and I will. I am hedging my position and I have taken some flack for that from the bears. I realize that I may be wrong, BUT. I have probably read close to 100 earnings reports from tech companies, with special attention to their forecasts. I have read analysts reports and quotes from industry leaders. In all of these cases, these common themes stand out: 1. Tech business has declined faster than anyone has ever seen; 2. Tech business will continue to decline next quarter, but the forecast is a slower rate of decline; 3. There is no real visibility beyond next quarter; 4. There are no obvious drivers for the next recovery; 5. The fed will prevent things from getting much worse; 6. Things are so bad they must get better soon. In 2000, when my porfolio was 6 times the value it reached at the bottom of '98, I was already 40% cash. Why? Because I could not believe the abject stupidity and corruption that was running rampant in the stock market. I won big last year because I knew what the numbers were and I had the discipline to stick to my plan. I knew that prices, including semi-equips, were ridiculous. I did not read any posts here that indicated that anyone else was concerned. Now, I hear the so called "experts" on the semi-equip cycle. Most have decided that the cycle may be sufficiently analyzed by looking at price movements and btb data since '95. It is irrelevant to these "experts" that semi-equips have not had even one normal cycle since '95. '97 was an artificial blip caused by SE Asian idiocy and '99-'00 was interrupted by the bursting bubble. No matter, prices moved up and down, and so did btb. As I said, I might be wrong. If I am, I will only participate with 50% stock. If I am wrong, the most likely reason will be that investors hold the prices up as long as it takes for tech business to get better. If I am right, Alan Greenspan will not be the only one soiling his pants over what happens.