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: Wolff who wrote (170665)	9/6/2002 1:26:10 AM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

I have to agree with the Duke, you do have no clue. I'll quote an old biz school professor of mine about corporate disclosure. The rule he gave us was simple: "Tell all you know, of get ready for a vacation in the steel chateau." His emphasis was always on the "ALL". All you know. Not, "all you know that is expedient," or "all you know that won't spook the markets," or "all you know, except for the difficult realities." ALL. During the boom, lots of CEOs forgot about the "all" part, and lots of investors like you were happy to let them if it helped the stock go up. Today, that nasty little "ALL" word is back in force. Whether you like it or not. Hence: > There is no reason to change guidance, the range is not broken, so they can stand on what they said before. < Nope. Six weeks ago they said they had good reason to believe revenues would be somewhere between 6.3 and 6.9. Today they no longer believe anything above 6.7 is possible. If they know it's not possible, they've got to disclose that fact. Sorry if it offends you. >The reason they need to emphasis customers are moving orders out until the last moment, and changes in the building of PCs making this effect even greater, is to show why they have no clue on the detail of where within the range they will come.< And my point was that anybody who's watched this industry for any length of time knows this already. It's called "limited visibility" and they've been talking about it for 2 years. An earnings CC is not the appropriate time for remedial instruction. In fact, that's exactly what Barrett was talking about in the far east that you apparently hate him for so much. He was pointing out that he has no visibility three months out and therefore has no clue what the holiday sales will be like, or if they will materialize at all. The people in the CC today did much the same thing, saying that we don't know what kind of seasonal effects (read: "Christmas season") we will have in Q4. I'm sorry that you don't like to hear bad news. The CEOs job is to deliver bad news when it's there, and to deliver uncertainty when there is uncertainty. You might argue that Intel needs a visionary leader and Barrett isn't the right guy. I'd agree with you to some degree. But to blame him for telling the truth because you don't like the truth is stupid. In the current environment there isn't a CEO out there who won't do the same thing. Even Cisco is being forced to be realistic about future growth. mg