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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rink who wrote (103366)	10/21/2003 8:25:48 AM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: "Weren't you one of them?" I was and I was abysmal at it. These guys are never interested in how a company will do long term; only the myopic next quarter. I once published a logical argument based report (a novel concept that I have never seen before or since) on why Cray Research's market price (and its market cap) led to logical absurdities. Cray enjoyed rediculous margins because it had no competition. It also bothered me that Seymour Cray, the founding company genious was always selling huge numbers of shares. IBM chose not to compete in that arena at that time because its market surveys showed that the eventual total market would never justify interest on its part. I argued that either the market was too small to justify Cray's market price which already presumed growth into a huge market; or, that, if that market really was there, such competitors a IBM and Control Data Corporation would enter that market in force. If that happened, I argued, Cray's margins would be cut and its growth would be stunted by the entry of real competition into Cray's exclusive domain. As an aside, I even identified the fledging inteL as a virtual future competitor. GOOD GRIEF !!! Cray quardrupled after my report; but, more recently what remains of it enjoys a market cap that is only a very small fraction of what it once was. I was given two very boring industries to cover: Electronics Distribution and Connector Companies. These are companies which the likes of Dan Niles can excel with since they need an ANALyst that thrives on working out earnings to 75 decimal places. I have long suffered profoundly from ADD but at that time I was still unaware of it. Composing reports on those incredibly boring industries nearly drove me crazy. My industry report on Electronic Distribution put a BUY (would be called a Strong BUY today) on Anthem Electronics and a HOLD on Hamilton/Avnet (a euphamism for SELL [or strong sell] even back then). I was on the sell side and our clients were institutions. Every client that I spoke to had no interest in Anthem since no significant position could be taken without disturbing the market. Further, the market for its securities was so illiquid that if things went south for the company, there would be NO EXIT (by some exitentalist or other). Anthem increased about twenty fold in a relatively short time and was eventually bought by Arrow as it appeared to be approaching Arrow in size. Not long after my report was published Tony Hamilton (yes that Hamilton) called me and told me that he was witnessing the semi industry upturn. Electronics Distributors usually get the very first indications. I published and my firm staked its reputation on my call by calling its institutional clients and spreading my insight. Ensuing events revealed that a further downturn in the industry recession was actually happening. I am not paranoid by nature; I am usually very trusting; but I, to this day, remain convinced that, that was Tony's payback for a call on his company that he did not like. I could go on but I am getting bored. (ADD does that to me.) Perhaps the above is illustrative of why I like to say: "Living well is the ultimate revenge." There are no victims and I get even with the many injustices that result from being alive. At least one poster has posted a trite "dime store" psychoanalysis of my "revenge". I suspect that his/her post(s) illustrate far more about the poster than about me. You're so vain (probably)...you probably think that this post is about you..'bout you... END OF RAMBLE, MOONSHOT

To: Rink who wrote (103366)	10/21/2003 1:17:49 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

re: Prescott Celerons. xbitlabs.com Rather than prove that there's nothing wrong with Intel's 90nm process, the very existence of these CPUs with only 256K L2 that max out at 3.06 GHz proves the opposite. Its an indication that Prescott is not binning well at all. If the entire cache is working, why wouldn't Intel sell these as P4s instead of Celerons? Could it be that HT doesn't work properly? Prescott is supposed to have some new CPU resources that should help HT efficiency, not the least of which is the 1M L2. Petz