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 (2218)	8/9/2002 12:28:55 PM
From: Kirk ©	Respond to of 25522

with all the investment in non pc related chip IP, it would make sense to me that Intel's sales would grow at a higher rate when we have a recovery so they might actually be able to afford more CapX once we get a recovery. They are spending at a high level TODAY so they have the capacity to take this very high margin business from the much smaller chip companies that had much higher valuations do to their high growth rates. Now that the little guys grew the market to sufficient size to interest Intel, Intel buys capx in the downturn to take the market in the next upturn. ANYONE that pays a huge amount for a tiny revenue company expecting 50% growth rates and 50% margins to take this company to the size of an Intel is asking to have their stock shorted... once the market is big enough for Intel, IBM, Motorolla, Agilent, etc. to spend the bucks to get into it.

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (2218)	8/9/2002 12:39:42 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25522

Banc of America just wants to be the new Financial Terrorists on the block.

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (2218)	8/9/2002 2:42:22 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25522

I think it is appropriate under INTC's current situation to compare capex and depreciation to earnings. INTC is in transition: 1. Monopoly PC processor pricing has fallen to AMD competition; 2. AMD has indicated that they will move toward a fabless model. This is possible because foundries are able to keep up with INTC's technology (all can buy from AMAT, ASML, etc.); 3. INTC has partnered with MSFT, but they have very different objectives. INTC needs PC software innovation to create demand for more powerful chips. MSFT uses its PC software domination to strengthen its control of the PC and gain control of other platforms and venues. It has stifled PC software innovation. I agree that INTC will "re-evaluate its manufacturing strategy". These guys are too smart to "fight the last war". I hope the market will understand that lowered INTC capex is company specific and does not imply lower industry capex. "Outsourcing front-end services" is a first step toward a fabless model.