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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Freep who wrote (8005)	5/24/2001 9:28:59 PM
From: Paul Shread	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 52237

Can't do anything more to that one than nod. You hit the nail on the head. No wonder the big boys are short the NDX futures. Anyone have any confirmation that INTC has spent two-thirds of that $7.5b? >>what level of growth will have to be achieved just to regain earnings/revenue levels of past years? << Let's face it, analysts are full of it, right? So why are their earnings estimates for INTC in 2002 (.80/share) almost half the 1.51 INTC earned in 2000? Could just be part of being wrong at the bottom, as analysts tend to be, but you raise a very good question. We'll never see growth rates and spending anything like 1999-2000 again, not even on a good rebound. Just a hunch. FWIW, the COMPX's average annual return since inception is 11%. I believe that's lower than the S&P over the last 30 years. What would happen to the Nasdaq if the growth rate was to return to the historic mean for a long period of time?