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: BelowTheCrowd who wrote (168742)	7/25/2002 8:50:17 PM
From: Stoctrash	Respond to of 186894

Bravo Michael...very good post. It's not about AMD vs INTC ...it's the whole ball of wax. ......and it's melting fast.

To: BelowTheCrowd who wrote (168742)	7/25/2002 10:56:15 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Michael, "mostly not IPO candidates now or ever. Just good solid businesses that will contribute to the economy for years to come." I already have asked this question before, but no one answered. I think you may know the answer. The question is: what percentage of US GDP comes from small "non-IPO" businesses, as compared to publicly-traded companies? Thanks in advance, - Ali

To: BelowTheCrowd who wrote (168742)	7/26/2002 5:27:25 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Michael, RE: "very small slice... a single sector. Silicon Valley isn't the economy." I strongly believe Silicon Valley is the hub of innovation, but let's refocus back to the point: Small companies react much, much faster than large companies. Many times the action that small companies take is then followed by large companies. Small companies are closer to the activity. Large companies are a bit more removed. So, if a very large number of startups -out of the blue- suddenly show a change 2 months ago (I'm not referring to our startup, but am referring to comments made by two people who have high visibility on a lot of startups), will large companies echo this change and mirror it down the road? ( For a purely hypothetical example, how JIT is HP's channel - does it accurately reflect true demand today that's been purchased and then deployed, real customers, or is it based upon projections on historical information? ( I'm making this example up, just using any company to apply a concept, without inferring anything specific. I don't follow HP's business. ) Startups operate at a JIT mode, so the data is current, but how responsive are large companies and how quick do large companies respond to field data? Any data that's older than 4 weeks is plain old. The wind can change fast. Has it? I don't know, because one can't consider (say) 100 new startups (not dotcom junk stuff, but solid firms) that suddenly experienced a change in revenue trend behavior at exactly the same time (so I'm told), to be an adequate sample pool since it's not an adequate pool size, though it is sufficiently significant enough to warrant potential concern and the question, is this economy going to get worse or double dip, or impact large companies? My concern isn't about startups. My concern is about large company public equities. Small companies are much, much faster than large companies to respond, and could possibly be indicators of what's to come for large companies. Is it? Additionally, high-tech startups may also show a here-and-now indicator on the health of other sectors of the industry. For example, if startups are finding it easier to sell into biotech (which they are), it could mean biotech is doing better than other sectors (or that the capex ax hasn't fallen there yet.) If startups are finding it easier to sell into the insur biz, it could mean the insur sector is doing better than other sectors. But if (say) 100 startups (am not referring to ours), suddenly experience a change in growth revenue trend, what does that mean? But the "sudden" (a month ago over a period of two months) change the (say) 100 startups experienced, could simply be a false alarm and if sentiment changes, it is highly likely it was. Fluctuations happen a lot with startups, since their revenue streams tend to come in glumps rather than small steady increments. Or, it could be something spooked capex spending again, like Bush's June warnings (weekly & daily) that created negativity. Either way, while a near-term concern for the economy, my main concern is not that. The point of my previous post, was to convey a more important concern, about large company public equities in the future: What's the impact to the future growth rate of large companies as it relates to the possibility of an impact to a portion of the driver of their revenue, due to the impinging of the economy? I tried to articulate this in my post, but by your response my point may not have registered. But I discovered an article that does a much better job of articulating a concern about the overall economy. There's a WS Economist (Kauffmann) that expands the concern to the big picture of the economy (rather than focused to just startups, he focuses on Public companies and the strong potential for an impinging economy.) (refer to post # 168759.) Again, I'll reiterate my main concern so it's clear: my concern is, how will this (Kauffman's point) impact large company public equities in the future? RE: "Want to find out about real opportunities. Talk to anybody BUT people in your own field. That's when real innovation can happen. Talk to anybody BUT people in your own field." It would be rather presumptuous to assume innovative types aren't spending their days (and evenings) talking to people and customers outside of their field. But let's get back on point, Kauffman's point about the economy is concerning as it relates to large company public equities in the future. Regards, Amy J