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: Petz who wrote (155351)	1/14/2002 5:43:57 PM
From: GVTucker	Respond to of 186894

John, RE: Even going back to 1996 (8 years from 1996 to 2003), the EPS back then were $1.70. (adjusted 4:1) The growth in earnings is still negative, so PE should be very low. 1996 split adjusted earnings for Intel were 73¢. $5.81/8 = .07263. (3 2 for 1 splits) edit: To really split hairs, using fully diluted (and better) numbers, the split adjusted earnings would be $5.72/8 or 72¢. So let's go for 11 years! In 1993, earnings were $5.20, but adjusted for splits, they were 0.65. There have been 4 2 for 1 splits since then, so the adjustment factor would be 16. Split adjusted earnings for '93 were 33¢. Yeah, a PE of 50 is probably unreasonable, but let's not give the bulls ammo for attack with inaccurate numbers.

To: Petz who wrote (155351)	1/14/2002 5:56:40 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

>Now do you understand why a PE of 50 for Intel is unreasonable? Nope. Considering that most semi companies have been in the red recently, P/E (not PE, he can be pretty cool) is pretty useless. Wait until other companies get back in the black and then start doing some comparisons- Is a company like AMD or MU worthless at this point? Of course not. -Z