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 : Applied Materials No-Politics Thread (AMAT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (742)	3/3/2002 6:08:12 PM
From: Fred Levine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25522

Brian, from Silicon Strategies of 3/1: And, the death of Novellus' business at Intel Corp. has been greatly exaggerated, according to Prudential. Rumors have been flying around the industry for weeks that Intel selected Applied Materials Inc. over Novellus for a big order of copper-electroplating tools. "Contrary to speculation, our checks indicate Novellus is not losing market share in copper electroplating but rather has gained further traction," according to the report. "The recent market share loss speculation stems from Intel, who has taken delivery of three Applied Materials tools for copper electroplating," the report said. "Intel's strategy at 300-mm has been to utilize dual sources and we believe this is not unusual," the report said. "To the contrary, we believe Novellus could have wins at STMicroelectronics and Toshiba, where it was not incumbent," it added.--M.L. --- fred

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (742)	3/4/2002 9:08:24 AM
From: Fred Levine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25522

A reflection from someone who watched my tech holdings drop precipitously: I think mistakes can be enormously important vehicles for learning. Indeed, I just finished writing a book where this is one of the major theses. In retrospect, I missed all the warnings from analysts that portended doom and gloom in techs, and it cost me money, especially in EMC and SCMR. We all know that analysts have a positive bias. Just look at the ratio of "Buy" to "Sell" recommendations. Therefore, we should give more credence to negative recommendations than positive ones. ML, SSB, and others were making negative recommendations during the time that AMAT, and others, were posting recorde results and I, therefore, ignored them. Given the standard positive bias, I should have paid heed. BTW, my book also has a section that saying, "if only" is a great way to become miserable, and is fruitless. I think I learned something. Negative recommendations have more validity than positive ones. comments? fred