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: Paul V. who wrote (48872)	7/8/2001 10:54:46 PM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 70976

Paul, sure - a pyramid can crystallize your thinking. You'll probably do some shifting of stocks and levels as you think about it. [SLB doesn't fit - did you mean SBC? TCI is Transcontinental Realty - did you think of the cable company that was bought by AT&T?]. Hey, the fun is in the building of the pyramid. Gottfried

To: Paul V. who wrote (48872)	7/8/2001 11:14:08 PM
From: Katherine Derbyshire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

The idea of a pyramid seems reasonable, but I'm not sure why you put the computer makers below the network gear makers. I would view the two groups as more like parallel branches of a tree. In this view, the software companies are the fertilizer: they supply the applications that make the tree grow. Katherine

To: Paul V. who wrote (48872)	7/8/2001 11:35:02 PM
From: Jerome	Respond to of 70976

>>>My question is whether this pyramid is practical and logical?<<< It looks logical to me. But for what would it be practical?..... Historically companies with good earnings and growth over some defined period of time are rewarded with stock price appreciation. But looking at your pyramid there will be winners and losers scattered throughout the pyramid in no particular l fashion or for no particular reason. But then the ancient Egyptians that had to build the first pyramids were asking the same question...>>>is this practical and logical?<<< Regards, Jerome

To: Paul V. who wrote (48872)	7/8/2001 11:45:36 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Hi Paul, Great idea. I suppose by telephone companies you mean companies that employ electronics technology and deal with end users. So why not put that category at the bottom base level, since that indicates greater number of units and greater number of dollars. ANd just for the sake of inclusivity, there should be automobile companies there and consumer electronics. Even though you may not want to buy their stocks, they are among the largest category of chip users. So knowing their state of health is an indicator of over-all chip demand. At the same base level (1) would be computers like COMPAQ and software like msft. Since they sell to the public, and their demand is driven by the same factors as cars and vcr's above would be (2) the networking hardware and software. your csco, lu, nt, .... the switch and router folks. above would be (3) their suppliers like chip and fiber makers, including fabs. ANd also including Intel, AMD, Micron, Mot, TXN,..... above would be (4) the tool makers, like amat, novellus, klac, ter, but also software like Cadence and Avanti! That is my humble proposal. ANd I very much enjoy reading all the posts here. Regards, Sarmad