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.

Technology Stocks : Kulicke and Soffa -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: reno21 who wrote (4925)	9/6/2001 3:04:41 PM
From: olduvai5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5482

I like the mantra! I have a little trouble seeing past the invective, though. I look at it this way: 1) Business sucks! 2) Consensus in the anal-yst ranks is that 2002 will barely get us back to 2000 levels 3) Everybody bought way more capacity than they needed in 2000 4) If we get back to peak 2000 levels by EOY2002, capacity buys will start again. 5) Back end will probably fare better than front end or process because 300mm will not drive huge sales of process, but more chips mean more testers and packagers. 6) Thus KLIC, TER, LTXX and A will come up before KLAC and AMAT. I'd really like to pick up a bunch of KLIC in the $10 range. I'd be pretty confident I'd double my money in 12 months. olduvai5

To: reno21 who wrote (4925)	9/6/2001 3:14:12 PM
From: scott_jiminez	Respond to of 5482

Very positive review of XP in NYT today (from Yahoo) >>Windows XP gets a glowing review in today's New York Times. Since there's absolutely no doubt that MANY, MANY users will require a big time upgrade (XP requires 128 MB DRAM and 2 GB of hard drive space...and a 400 mHz processor. In fact the author states that if your computer is more then 18 months old, well, good luck trying to use XP), if XP is as wildly popular as expected, the PC market, and hence the semis, could have quite the lovely fall and winter. << messages.yahoo.com The article from the Times' web site(may require free sign-in) nytimes.com