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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MARKET INDEX TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - MITA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15974)	1/30/2003 1:47:22 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

ok -- I looked at that article -- and I'll even finish reading it Lizzie. here's a question for you >>Dig into the Commerce Dept.'s Oct. 31 report on the GDP and you'll see that third-quarter capital outlays on equipment and software--which account for roughly 80% of capital spending--increased 6.5% over the second quarter. That's double the 3.3% increase the second quarter turned in over the first. << What is the lifetime of such software and equipment? Software has a notoriously short lifetime -- I'm not sure what the other parts are here, but have you ever read Dr. Richebacher concerning net capital investment and why it is relatively long-lived capital outlays that are the basis for profits? Show me accelerating investment in such long-lived assets and I may think you have something -- increased spending on software is not the kind of investment that will generate long term profit growth, IMO. I find Dr. Richebacher's arguments on this issue to be convincing and well studied. If you haven't read them, would you, if I can find a link?? Telcom infrastructure probably falls in the mid-range category (for depreciation life) and semi capex, too ... I would expect.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15974)	1/30/2003 1:56:57 PM
From: yard_man	Respond to of 19219

this is BS cheerleading and plain wrong -- I will try and find the link to Dr. Richebacher. Productivity is BS. It is net capital investment that is needed ... upgrading software isn't gonna do it. Construction does matter and so does debt. What is going to be the foundation for profits in the coming turnaround?? There has to be some acceleration of sales for someone -- the consumer hasn't cut back -- so it isn't coming from consumer spending bouncing back from terribly anemic levels -- as was the case in the early 90's. Surely you don't suppose that profits are going to appear with sales declining for everyone?? Right now, I know of two areas of the economy that have significant growth -- homes and autos -- but that growth is slowing and can't power a recovery -- where is the growth going to come from -- war spending?? >>The construction collapse isn't necessarily bad news for the economy. Companies that are spending little on structures have been able to redirect more of their limited capital budgets to info tech and other new equipment that can quickly enhance productivity, notes Richard B. Berner, chief U.S. economist for Morgan Stanley. True, the quarter-to-quarter gains this year are a far cry from hikes of 18% to 20% in early 2000. <<

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (15974)	1/30/2003 4:33:03 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

But what I read is that bears think things are not getting better from a business standpoint, whereas I know that they are. Lizzie Things are getting better and you know it!!!!??? That strikes me as absurd. What is INTC saying? What is MSFT saying? The sad thing is those guys are liars for the most part, who always stress the positive. There really is nothing good to say and the economy is going to hell in a handbasket. If stocks traded at fair value, the spoos would be 400 points lower and god only knows where the tech wreck would be. Pray tell what is the evidence that says you KNOW things are getting better. Even if there is an uptick of some sort, stock prices have about 400% of it priced in, AND any uptick is simply not sustainable. M