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: John F. Dowd who wrote (166835)	6/22/2002 12:14:37 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Thoughtful provocative posts. Let me note that in '97 and I think following years, Intel stock price goes into the sort of summer solstice. June seems always flat to down, way up after July 1st. This could be some sort of window dressing. After all just everyone is eschewing tech, wouldn't be good to be holding at the june 30 snapshot holding date. So there is a lot of selling before and a lot of re-buying right after. As far as AG goes, remember that first and foremost, he works for the banks, not for us. So its not so much the loose money in y2k, many, including Alan, did not understand it was a bullshit rumor started by the gartner group, nor was it the tightening. Greenspans JOB is to keep inflation in check. What is significant is that the Glass Steagal act was eviscerated and banks were allowed to be brokers right before the crash, and the evisceration of the TELE Dereg Act, which blew the communications industry out the window. Just like the savings and loans were allowed to get into real estate right before the 89 crash in the realestate business. Note that campaign finance reform has been buried. So, maybe, it is more of a feeling by the general population that our elected officials can do what ever they want to fool the American Public. The new FCC wants to destroy small isps in the name of competition. If we can use the internet to get one little lousy campaign finance reform passed, what's it good for, anyway. This sort of feeling pervades, don't ya think? I could solve all this stuff for everyone, but no one has asked me.

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (166835)	6/22/2002 2:26:59 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, I'm in a small minority that thinks Greenspan did a good job. I disagreed with the last rate hike, and thought he should have cut rates one month sooner, but that a boom bust cycle doesn't make. The fact is that businesses had built capacity and inventory to levels that assumed far too much growth, and that has always been the point where the business cycle teaches everyone a lesson. Greenspan is an easy target to blame, or to give credit to, as they did when things were going well. But his influence is limited. And Greenspan is "liberal" compared with some of the Chairman we've had in the past. In fact history may judge him as too liberal, allowing the boom that created the subsequent bust. John

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (166835)	6/23/2002 8:14:04 AM
From: Dave	Respond to of 186894

John, Not to "overflow" you inbox, but I disagree. If AG's tightening caused the markets to decline, then his "loosening" should've caused the markets to rebound. In fact, this has not happened. These so-called "investors" were chasing returns. Companies that just went public, especially many dot coms, had market capitalizations higher than many companies that had been around for years. What the late 90s represented was the end of an economic cycle since everyone was drinking the Kool-Aid and valuations were thrown out the window.