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 (63913)	5/18/2002 5:29:15 PM
From: Tito L. Nisperos Jr.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, for Paul V and also me, we find it more convenient to use the prices as they occured for comparison purposes. That is because long time ago we found out AMAT investors use the split unadjusted prices as guide to trade presently. Yes, we know we doubled our money after each split. I'm sure that if Paul V used Split adjusted prices, he would not have come up with 101 plus a few cents as High for 1999. Others who relied solely on PE calculations sold out at 30 more or less during that time. As for you, although you strongly believed that PE (or something like that) matters a lot --- you were wise enough to have closed your eyes and waited for 127 before saying --- "Okay, that's it I'm getting out!"

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (63913)	5/19/2002 10:17:19 PM
From: Paul V.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, Gottfried, Tito, Cary >Why aren't you using the real (split-adjusted) stock prices? That would be a better way to compare different peaks and troughs.< I wanted to show the relative range of the presplit dollars which appears to normally run down to the low or mid $20 before AMAT starts their upward movement during the cycles I have observed IMO, using your suggestion AMAT would have been in the teens or less In post split dollars, As a example, I believe you purchased AMAT during latest bottom in the 20's. Why? Why not wait until the teens or less. Additionally, none of us could have predicted that the institutions would hold the shares at approx. $40 dollars presplit during this latest cycle nor AMAT splitting 2 X 1 this early nor that 9/11 would have occurred causing AMAT to drop in the 20’s.. IMO, I do not remember AMAT falling into the teens or lower in presplit terms. My logic may be flawed but it has worked for me. Thirty-six dollars ($36) in presplit terms currently would be $72. I do not expect AMAT to fall back to the low twenties or $40 presplit during this cycle. Additionally, I do not expect AMAT to hit $115 post split after this recent split, but I could be wrong. Tito, Gottfried, Cary, Lester E. and Brian have seen the long movement from the bottoms to the tops with AMAT over the last two cycles. Collectively, they could give us a good projection. However, none of us projected a top of $230 in presplit terms during the 1998-00 cycle. I do not put to much stock in the PE, especially with AMAT, since I find it most difficulty to predict the emotions of those investing in the market. IMO, no one would ever purchase AMAT based on PE. If they purchased AMAT at its low PE they most generally would have purchased AMAT at its high price. In our NAIC club, we had difficulty in getting individuals to purchase AMAT because of its high PE due to its low EPS. However, those of us who followed AMAT prevailed. However, Jacob, those of on this site are always looking for a better predictive criteria which guarantee success. <ggg> We encourage all to participate in the development of better criteria. Another subject. Jacob, what is you take on biogenetics and nanotechnology from an investors standpoint. What are the pros and cons of investing in these areas at this time? Thanks for your feedback. Just my opinions. Paul