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 : Semi Equipment Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Return to Sender who wrote (50927)	1/23/2011 12:49:54 PM
From: Donald Wennerstrom	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95520

This is the weekly look at the Group stocks in terms of earnings estimates, growth estimates, and price changes sorted by price percent change. The Group hit a big "speedbump" this week losing 5.6 percent at the bottom line. A majority of the earnings estimates were upgrades this week, but it made no difference, prices took a dive. These results were obtained even though it was only a 4 day trading week. Quarterly reports were in general very good, but again, it made no difference. Example - ASML had a consensus estimate of 0.98, actual of 1.26, and down 4.6 percent for the week. In addition, ASML"s Curr Yr estimate was raised by 0.76 to 3.46 and Nxt Yr's estimate was raised by 0.91 to 4.02 giving it a next year PE of 10.

To: Return to Sender who wrote (50927)	1/23/2011 12:52:56 PM
From: Sam	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95520

completely OT rant-- This investmenthouse guy has a bugaboo about subsidies to "green" that is irritating to me: Without getting too vulgar, GE had to have green jobs, and it saw a way in this President and administration with its pie-in-the-sky views on making green energy a reality even though, economically, it is not. Immelt saw that as their salvation, and GE pushed these green programs. It is the contractor and direct beneficiary of billions of stimulus dollars for so-called green projects. These projects could not have made it without government subsidy. Well, guess what, the railroads wouldn't have been built in the 19th C w/o government help in all sorts of ways. The airlines wouldn't have gotten off the ground without government subsidies. Most--possibly all--of the farms in the southwest wouldn't exist today without government built dams and continuing extensive water subsidies, not to mention the extensive population centers out there today that exist in what are effectively government-built oases in the middle of a large desert. The auto industry and its many offshoots (including gasoline and oil) in this country wouldn't have thrived without government subsidies. The internet wouldn't exist without government subsidies. Pharmaceutical and medical device companies wouldn't have made billions and billions of dollars without government sponsored research. And what the hell does he think would have happened in the past two years if the banks hadn't been given "free money" by the government with their policies? I could go on and on, but will stop there. Why does he pick on alternative energies for his ire? Because--and this part is just speculation on my part, because I can't read his mind, I can just infer this--there is already an energy industry with vested interests, and he "thinks" that we shouldn't bother with alt-energy. He is FoS when he goes on these little rants of his, he needs to learn some real economic history rather than just memorizing a few bits of received "wisdom" from some economic theorists who love their own version of "let the free markets take care of business." As if it wasn't followers of some of those same free market, low tax, minimal government "theorists" who didn't get us into this mess to begin with. EDIT: I just read this line: "China will trample us under its hooves because it is in business for business' sake; in other words, profit. It wants to improve its country, and it knows the way to do it is through entrepreneurship and letting the small businesses make their moves." ROFL, what utter nonsense! Why does he think that Chinese alt-energy companies are thriving? Why does he think that Chinese business is thriving? The Chinese govt is giving them subsidies hand over fist! And "choosing winners" all the time! Not to mention manipulating their currency. China is thriving because they have a combination of low cost labor force and an small educated elite (relatively speaking--small relative to their own population, large relative to the populations of most countries) and a government that wants them all to thrive. This guy really needs to do some studying if he wants to make these kinds of rants, he doesn't know what he is talking about. End rant. Won't bring this up again.