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: Road Walker who wrote (170195)	8/27/2002 7:18:03 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Barrett is doing fine. Look what Grove left him with... Willy Rambus i820s Timna no <1000 computer market? venturing into non profitable non-cpu areas trying to invest in stocks of .com companies The main tenuous thing I see about Barrett and Intel now is possible overcapacity. Jim

To: Road Walker who wrote (170195)	8/27/2002 7:32:03 PM
From: L. Adam Latham	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

John: Barrett expected "modest growth in the third quarter over the second quarter." In the Q2 earnings report, Intel predicted Q3 revenues of $6.3B to $6.9B, while Q2 revenues were $6.3B. So the question is what is "modest" growth? Intel's usual "speak" is "flat" (meaning 0% +/- 1 or 2%), "up/down slightly" (meaning ~2.5%), or "up/down" (meaning ~5% or higher). If it's 5%, then they'll be near the mid-point of their guidance, which isn't too bad in this environment, and is much better than having to issue a downward mid-quarter revision for revenues. If "modest" equates to "up slightly" it would put them in the lower portion of revenue guidance, but still avoids a downward revision. Adam

To: Road Walker who wrote (170195)	8/27/2002 10:15:10 PM
From: Wolff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Yes Jim, this is the second time I remember the comments coming from the far east. Perhaps he is getting hopped up on too much MSG in the food ;-) I don't know what the rationale is. But one thing is clear is that nobody has clue to what Christmas spending will be, and there is no reason for the CEO of Intel to try to GUESS what the consumers of Intel’s customers will be. Barrett took himself out of the role of supplier to consumer and industrial integrators and placed Intel as the consumer expert. Big mistake all the way around. When Fairchild split up, AMD got the marketing department, National the Manufacturing, and Intel the Engineers, I would argue that Intel is now in the a product life cycle where its not best served by an Engineer in the top spot. Barrett should said something like “ We are cautiously optimistic while waiting to see more firm orders from customers coming in, Q4 has always been our strongest quarter and we hope to see spending match past years performance, right now orders by out customers are not giving a clear picture, but we suspect that is because of supply chain management systems which are allowing our customers to place orders at the very last moment” IE A big fancy -I simply don’t know.- Instead Barrett comes out like the guy from Gulliver’s Travels “We’ll never make it” Today was simply a mistake, and I don’t think Intel can afford to let this keep on happening.