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: Saturn V who wrote (181380)	5/27/2005 7:26:24 AM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 186894

Saturn, the analysts sounded less than sanguine at the last CC - I detected a slight change in the tone of voices and sharper questions between that call and the ones during the boom. Which is GOOD. Because it means they are doing their jobs, finally. I think their change is reflective of their acknowledgment their industry could have asked tougher questions during the boom across the entire hightech industry. (Of course, I also wondered why anyone would use precious time asking, "how many weeks are there in a quarter?") If there's any honeymoon, I don't think it's from the analyst community based upon the tones in the call, but rather from the mutual fund managers who have identified value. The analysts sounded like they weren't certain to believe Bryant or Otellini during the last CC. And who can blame them after last year's promise didn't materialize? In the last CC, Intel said capacity was strained, and a post at that time on IHUB said Intel had said on that call 3 or 4 months on certain product lines. (Which I interpreted as a shortage.) To me, the stock is moving up because WS is finally believing what Intel said at the last CC. But here's what's not clear to me: how tight, exactly what is tight and are there any lead-times on anything. There was an article yesterday where Intel said there was no shortage, yet the article said mobos weren't sure. So that's confusing. In the article, Intel said they would not raise forecasts for companies but stick to their original build schedules (to avoid double ordering which caused a huge mess in 2000). But business situations can change, so not sure if such a hard line is the right approach. Regards, Amy J