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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (10475)	11/6/1997 3:42:00 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Cary, I too am concerned if that is the true rate of growth. I bought into AMAT with assumptions of greater growth and would have to reevaluate my positions if in fact I believe that AMAT's growth should slow into the low 20's. I hope JM provides some clear guidance Nov. 20, since this and this alone is keeping the stock ~$20 from its previous high IMHO. The stock will not continue its run until JM can dispel some of the uncertainty surrounding the whole sector at this time. BTW, just a thought. Do you believe JM could be understating future revs by a great amount because he expects AMAT increase its share in each of its respective markets? Lately there has been more and more pressure on the titans of computerdom with the smaller players claiming that the Giants are not playing fair. We have seen it with both INTC and MSFT and I have read numerous articles about competitors complaining about AMAT and their enforcement of patents Read:litigation. If AMAT were to reveal what it thought its true revs were expected to be, maybe this would be increased ammunition for the likes of LRCX, NVLS et al to present their respective cases to the FTC, since many of the potential revs would come by AMAT's "eating their lunch." What do you think? Regards, Brian