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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: H. Bradley Toland, Jr. who wrote (125950)	12/10/2002 11:30:39 AM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Hueyone, you're right. I meant to say 40 times. It (MSFT) traded that high about every year with the low coming in around 28 times. If you had used my link in my last post to create a bar chart for MSFT PEs, you would have seen that MSFT never reached a 40 PE until 1997, one of the early bubble valuation years. And even in that year it appears to barely ever make a 40 PE, and may in fact, not have quite reached a 40 PE in that year. (It is difficult to tell precisely from the bar chart). with the low coming in around 28 times. In sixteen years, again from the PE bar charts, it looks like there are only three years where MSFT didn't reach a low PE of 28 in its yearly PE trading ranges---'97, '99 and '01 and there is one more year, '98, where it barely made a PE of 28, but did not go much lower. IMO, these are all years included in the bubble valuation era. In most years, there has been an opportunity to pick up MSFT around 25 times earnings. You can follow my Big Charts instructions in my last post to reconstruct this data. If you have links to other data that contradicts my information, please share it. Naturally there is a possibility that the bar charts are incorrect, but I am not going to take the time to reconstruct the information from other sources unless I have some good reason to believe the bar charts are wrong. At this point I do not. Those PEs are consistent with my memory, limited as though my memory may be.<gg> Best, Huey