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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (28015)	4/25/2005 10:06:45 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

re: ALTR, AMAT, ASML, KLAC, LLTC, NVLS, MXIM, XLNX. With almost all of these, "long term" has meant more than 20 years. "Has meant" doesn't mean "will mean". We're looking forward, not backward, and 20 years in tech prediction is a fantasy. Ten years is gross arrogance. John

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (28015)	4/26/2005 3:10:35 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

OT What is NVLS worth?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (28015)	4/26/2005 10:43:44 PM
From: Pam	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 60323

Hi Cary, Certainly, most risks are very difficult to quantify accurately, or even ballpark. Certainly, risks that are "properly identified" are "worthwhile to look at". In fact, if, after looking, an investor has no more idea about quantifying the risks than the author, the investor should probably avoid any investment. In general, I agree with you but if one has put in a reasonable amount of time and effort researching a company, I think, one can make a decent evaluation of the risks even though the analyst has not quantified them. I don't think it is even necessary to use a calculator for this, mental evaluation would be just fine. It is almost impossible to do a precise calculation anyway! Obviously, there will be some risks that are very high to quantify but that should not prevent one from investing. For ex. if you have seen SNDK presentation materials, Fab1, 2 and 3 are all within the same compound. One of the risk is terrorist attack (pg. 26 latest 10-Q). It is possible that significant damage can be caused to these Fabs and irrespective of the insurance carried by the company, it could cause severe damage to the company. The question is do you still invest in it or not? The answer has to be yes, unless the odds of such an attack are higher than the tolerance you have. ALTR, AMAT, ASML, KLAC, LLTC, NVLS, MXIM, XLNX. With almost all of these, "long term" has meant more than 20 years. Again, I agree that some of these definitely qualify as candidates for "sustainable competitive advantage" but whether it will last next 20 years, I am not too sure. Things change in almost all industries and more so in the technology sector. What I find is that those companies that are doing something more mundane and basic are just as likely to survive than the ones doing bleeding-edge work. They may not be consistently profitable so one still has to buy and sell every now and then to make money in them but they do survive. If one thinks that you can invest in one of the 8 techs that you mentioned and leave them alone, you will be surprised to see what I have for you in the link below. Tech sector is way to dynamic and if you get in at the wrong time into an investment there is no guarantee you would be in the money even 10 years down the road! I looked at how SNDK fared in the last 9 years (why 9 years because there was no SNDK before that!) along with your proposed names and I think SNDK did just fine. quotes.nasdaq.com I agree, this is all in the rear-view mirror and what we care about is the future. I do have my own concerns about SNDK and know things could get ugly very quickly but no stock is immune to such a risk. I just look at what my investment horizon is and do a reasonable evaluation as to what is the likelyhood of unfavorable events affecting my investment in that period. I have always regarded Samsung as the Gorilla of Nand flash business (at least for now) and it could do a lot of damage to SNDK and others if they decided to but I don't see them getting rid of SNDK for a while (which is longer than my investment horizon). Sandisk is a risky investment even at these levels but it also offers a potential for decent returns over the next few quarters. -Pam