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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan3 who wrote (153928)	1/5/2002 6:51:35 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, Yeah, but they keep spending $7.5 Billion each year while only including $4 Billion in depreciation as a "cost of goods sold." First of all, what I recommend you do is go to www.freeedgar.com and look @ Intel historically. By the way I did and I present to you some numbers (by the way, numbers are in Billions of dollars and I rounded to the nearest hundredth (US))... 3Q01 FY2000 FY1999 FY1998 PP&E** 33.52 23.41 23.56 21.07 DEP. 3.04 3.25 3.19 2.81 CAPEX 6.18 6.67 3.40 3.56 If you notice, historically, Intel's Depreciation Expense has been rising. Remember, we don't have FY01 numbers, however if we extrapolate, Depreciation for FY01 should be ~$4B (give or take). Yeah, but they keep spending $7.5 Billion each year while only including $4 Billion in depreciation as a "cost of goods sold." Unfortunately, you are wrong. So far, with the data I have presented, Intel has never spent 7.5B on CAPEX and has never had a depreciation expense of 4B. While it might be true that in FY01, your figures might be correct, I would listen to Intel MGMT and hear what they state as to what they believe CAPEX will be in FY02. My response is "I don't think they can cut CAPEX while AMD is pushing them so hard, they will need to implement SOI, for example, starting after next year." And my response to you is that most of the consumers who use a computer really could not care less which process technology the uP in their computer use. When you purchase an automobile, do you care about the various technologies used in manufacturing your engine? To the average consumer, MHz is the equivalent to performance. The higher the MHz, the more performance the user expects.