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: Sam Citron who wrote (49840)	7/26/2001 3:16:42 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Sam, Rather than split adjusted, try setting P/S adjusted targets. It seems to me that current trough levels are roughly equal to prior cycle Peak levels of sales. or approximately so... Ian

To: Sam Citron who wrote (49840)	7/26/2001 3:20:13 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

Sam, Bears repeat over and over the mantra that history must repeat itself and the market must make its bottom in a flaming collapse. In short swift corrections that may be the case. We have been going at this one for 18 months. My low point came in april as i watched my former boss sellout of the market at a whopping loss at 1650 naz. I didnt sell that day and am prepared to revisit it if necessary. But again i say, time is on our side. As the bear gets long in tooth, the bull is just around the corner. And around the corner for the markets could mean 6-9 months out which is anticipated by the markets. I think this fact greatly lessens the chances of repeat flamer a la october 1998. mike

To: Sam Citron who wrote (49840)	7/26/2001 7:00:35 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

I think it would be rational to adjust the '98 lows for an improvement in the balance sheets, cash, working capital, and book. I think it would be worth a discusssion. When I set up my price ranges, I set the bottom to be the adjusted '96 and '98 lows, approximately. When you wonder why things seemed so bleak in '98, consider profits and losses. Losses and the prospect of continuing losses without an obvious end, drove the prices down. Relative prices within the sector were pretty reasonable so complete panic was absent. We have had a precipitous fall in orders since last summer, but backlog has kept the leaders profitable. If orders stay down another 4 quarters, this will not be the case and I expect prices to fall toward the bottom of my range. It is looking more and more likely that orders will stay down until the middle of 2002.

To: Sam Citron who wrote (49840)	7/26/2001 11:03:09 PM
From: Katherine Derbyshire	Respond to of 70976

>>Sure there was a typical boom-bust cycle in semis and equip at that time, but I do not remember anything resembling today's uncertainty or collapse of end-user demand. Of course, this might be just my own myopia or amnesia.<< Remember that the Asian mess was partly because of overinvestment in semiconductor manufacturing. In addition to the cyclical bust induced by the DRAM crash, there was a very real fear that substantial amounts of equipment already out there would not be paid for because the purchasers were going bankrupt. While the US economy remained healthy (thanks in part to the much despised Mr. Greenspan), several Asian countries teetered on the brink of financial collapse. Remember the video footage of Koreans donating gold jewelry to the government to help it raise hard currency? The US is in worse shape now than it was in October 98, but the global economy as a whole is much healthier. Katherine