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: Elmer who wrote (155618)	1/15/2002 10:41:56 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Elmer, I think the CapEx decline is larger than the street expected, but this is a good thing for both Intel and AMD. As you point out, going to 12" wafers should increase output per fab, and/or allow larger chips like Itanium. Maybe the CapEx reduction is tacit admission that AMD will keep between 20 and 25% market share ad infinitum. With CapEx closer to the prior estimates of ~6.5B, Intel may have been trying to obtain enough capacity to single-handedly supply the entire market 3-4 years from now. Petz

To: Elmer who wrote (155618)	1/15/2002 11:37:03 PM
From: brushwud	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Andy Bryant just explained the whole thing at about 13 minutes into the call. He explained how much higher capex would be in 2002 if not for 300mm. Why the analysts and the HemDroids can't get this through their heads is beyond me. Because it contradicts Rock's Law: "the cost of capital equipment to build semiconductors will double every four years"? intel.com Long-term holders of Intel haven't observed that cap ex has decreased as wafer size has increased from 2" to 8", and the transition from 8" to 12" certainly doesn't herald a new millennium. And whenever was the cost of a fab mostly for bricks & mortar, rather than equipment? If you listen to Intel's CCs, they'll tell you it's great when they increase cap ex & then six months later let you know how great it is to reduce cap ex. Meanwhile everyone knows it's a leading indicator of future growth. But FUD is your name, and your game.

To: Elmer who wrote (155618)	1/16/2002 9:51:44 AM
From: willcousa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

This is not about the analysts understanding what a reasonable capex would be for intel in 02 nor is it about what a reasonable expectation of intel capex should have been for the tech equipment companies. It is about one more opportunity to beat down the tech sector coming into option expirations on Friday. The tech equipments had run well above the max pain point (the market price for the stock which leaves the most outstanding options contracts to expire worthless). Now they have been driven into the optimum range. Big profit days for the options market insiders.