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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (53566)	10/2/2001 3:37:08 PM
From: Grashopper	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

So did you buy amat today?/

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (53566)	10/2/2001 3:45:55 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Headlines like this sound as if the bottom is near. All we need them to say now is that we are going from the computer back to the abacus and we know that a bottom is in:-) [video] Avoid All Computer Stocks, Says PC Analyst [8.4 min] vision.yahoo.com

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (53566)	10/2/2001 3:52:59 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, Does the fact that we have had a technology bubble and that P/Es are still very high historically do anything to temper your bullishness? Sam

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (53566)	10/2/2001 3:59:45 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

Sort of like we lived our lives during the Cold War, assuming the Soviet ICBMs hadn't just been launched. Jacob, Cold war took some getting used to and this is what we are doing now. This must be like the days in the early 50's when we learned the Soviets had the bomb. Folks here panicked. Led to McCarthyism etc. Hope this event doesnt have that backlash effect at least not in an organized way. mike

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (53566)	10/2/2001 7:52:46 PM
From: John Trader	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, Great post, I sure hope you are right about the rally. You are a man of courage. No question that the bearish theaders such as yourself, Cary, etc. nailed it right-on, but as you mentioned, Sept. 11 was not in the predictions, so that part at least was unexpected for all of us. If one is bullish here, a really difficult question then is what stocks do you go with. On the conservative side in the tech area, stay with tech blue chips like AMAT, CSCO, TXN, etc. Companies that will survive. However, there may be much more rebound from smaller companies that are beaten down more and are solid, if one can determine which ones that is. I always get nervous with small stocks about the possibility of them being bought out on the cheap (i.e. not much rebound), or worse yet, just getting overpowered by a bigger company moving into the space, or a big customer switching suppliers. Of course one should be able to address the buyoout part by buying stocks that are 50+% insider owned. There have been some amazing rebounds from the low in 98 to the high in 2000. Of course this will not repeat, but still amazing to consider. Just as one for discussion sake, consider SNDK, the flash memory maker, which is 50% insider owned. In 98 it got down to about cash value, then went up about 40 times to the peak. A Barrons article this spring argued it was a very good buy at around 21. If anyone is interested I can repost the article. It is now at 9 and change, about 1.5 times cash value. They are making a card that goes with the new Palm models, so are perhaps being hit with the misfortunes of Palm a bit. It could be an early mover though - is tied to consumer spending. Having said all that I am currently out of it, sold at around 23 I think. It would be fun in a way to get a bit of discussion here on what are the potential big rebounds from these levels in a year or two (or three, or ...?). To qualify I suggest that such a company must be an obvious survivor. Not an EXDS type stock. Of course another approach is to buy LEAPS and stay with the blue chip tech names. Thanks again for your post, and best wishes to all, John