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: Paul Engel who wrote (39470)	11/7/1997 5:13:00 PM
From: William Hunt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

PAUL, JOHN - MORE DEFINITION ON THE MEETING -Dow Jones Newswires -- November 7, 1997 Intel Rallies As Word Leaks Out From Embargoed Meeting By Christopher Grimes and Steven M. Sears NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Intel Corp. (INTC) stock is rallying, apparently because its quarterly meeting with analysts isn't as glum as had been expected. The chip maker's stock opened at 72 5/16, but recently rebounded to as high as 77. Under Intel's ground rules, journalists and analysts are supposed to keep the information discussed at the meeting to themselves until after it ends. But several traders said word has leaked out that Intel isn't saying anything that would cause them to lower their fourth-quarter earnings estimates. Short-sellers are chasing the stock all over the tape as market makers refuse to negotiate. At the end of October, Intel had one of the largest jumps in short interest as short-sellers increased their position by 7.7 million shares to 32.4 million shares. "A lot of people are trying to get long," a source said. "Expectations were so low. People were shorting it going into the meeting," said a short seller specializing in technology issues. "They said something to make somebody happy." Before the meeting, SoundView Financial Group analyst Scott Randall said Intel usually tries to guide the discussion away from specifics about the quarter and toward what he calls the "30,000-foot-view." Randall said analysts would probably be listening closely for any hints about capital spending in 1998, as well as indications about fourth-quarter earnings. The company's stock has been hammered because its third quarter earnings disappointed slightly and because some analysts are worried that a trend to lower-priced computers could affect Intel's margins. Even though the stock is up 2 13/16 at 76 1/4, it's still trading below its 10-day moving average of 77.18 and its 200-day moving average of 80.94. Volume was heavy at 20.5 million shares, compared with average daily volume of 17 million shares. - By Christopher Grimes, 201-938-5253; and Steven Sears, 201-938-5355. At the analysts' meeting, Intel Chief Operating Officer Craig R. Barrett said the company expects 1997 capital spending to hit $4.5 billion. That sum could rise another $600 million to $700 million if the government approves Intel's acquisition of a Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) semiconductor plant before the end of the year. Barrett went on to say he expects 1998 capital spending to follow past growth trends and rise from the 1997 total. The company will release a more detailed projection at the end of the fourth quarter. Intel also told analysts it didn't expect the trend of sub-$1,000 personal computers to pressure its margins over the short or long term. The company's focus will be on trimming manufacturing costs to lower the price of its microprocessors. Intel also expects to add extra features to its products such as software modems. Intel said its processors are in 90% of computers selling between $900 to $999, but only 65% of those selling at $900 or less. In commenting on current business, Chief Financial Officer Andrew Bryant said October sales were "consistent" with the company's fourth-quarter guidance for revenue to be slightly up from the third quarter. However, several analysts and investors were skeptical of Intel's explanation that revenue wouldn't show a greater rise in the fourth quarter. Bryant said the forecast reflects anticipated soft sales in Japan, currency crises in Southeast Asia and inventory corrections linked to a greater number of build-to-order programs by computer makers. Build-to-order programs are reducing inventory of computer components such as processors. In its presentation, Intel said the build-to-order trend will have sliced between $500 million and $1 billion in 1997 revenue. This inventory reduction, however, should be completed by the end of the year, Bryant said. Meanwhile, the company adopted a surprisingly bullish outlook toward its prospects in the server market. It said it expects its server business to grow significantly faster than many industry experts anticipate. Intel also said it will release a new set of specifications in the next several months for so-called network computers, which would sell at between $500 and $1,200. The machines will use processors from among Intel's family of Pentium chips. In summary, Intel chief executive Andrew S. Grove said he saw many opportunities facing the company in a computer market that is becoming increasingly fragmented. Intel is responding by designing products tailored to each market segment, he said. "We intend to capitalize on these opportunities," Grove said. "We are trying to design a microprocessor for each (market) segment (and) we expect to be leaders in all these segments." -By Mark Boslet; 415-496-1366 4 44 PM EST 11-07- BEST WISHES BILL

To: Paul Engel who wrote (39470)	11/7/1997 6:04:00 PM
From: mauser96	Respond to of 186894

OFF SUBJECT... There are a lot of bogus factors about mutual funds. For instance, if a large fund with poor performance takes over a tiny one with good performance, the resulting union can use the tiny funds record. Past performance might well mean a different manager than today's, but a lot of funds don't release this information. The figures for mutual funds in general is distorted by survivorship bias.(the worse funds are closed or merged and vanish from the stastics) Until very recently, funds were limited in the amount of short term profits they could take, often forcing them to turn a profit into a loss because they couldn't sell. There is a strong tendency for fund managers to cluster around the mean, because performance figures close to the benchmark won't get them fired. In fact, most large funds are closet indexers, with the disadvantage of higher expenses than true index funds. I own only a few mutual funds and half of them are index funds.