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: Road Walker who wrote (41974)	12/11/1997 1:19:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, >>>If they do have a clear understanding of what impact Asia will have on their revenues, I do think it would be in the best interest of stockholders to release that information<<< If Intel were a normal company, they would have Analysts in bed with them, their PE would be 40 rather 20, they would make their numbers this quarter and warn during CC about next quarter. Analysts would quietly lower their numbers for next quarter and next year, few would notice the difference. However, knowing Intel, I doubt that guidance in September was overly optimistic, Asian currency debacle will have little or no impact, Company will not pre warn, but Company will miss estimates by 2 or 3 cents - when they don't really have to show it that way - and they will issue some statements at CC that will confuse the hull out of Wall Street. Long term the company will continue to do what it does best and PE will so verrry slowly inch its way up. No complaints - that is what I knowingly bought into. Correct me if you think my weltanshauung is overly simplistic - but if you don't know what weltanshauung means - I would just as soon if you didn't make any comments. Regards, Mary

To: Road Walker who wrote (41974)	12/11/1997 1:39:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear John, **off topic** Sorry about the tone of my last message. Got carried away - forgot who I was writing to. Regards, Mary

To: Road Walker who wrote (41974)	12/11/1997 1:56:00 PM
From: Charles Skeen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: <<<I'm not sure where you are getting your information about bad product mix. . .>>> No information -- just a rather obvious inference drawn from the news and comments on this board about the sub-$1000 (OK, sub-$1500) computer and the major chunk of the market that it has attained. Two months ago, there were those on this board still in a state of denial that such a thing could exist. Now it is denial about profit margins for this and coming quarters. Some here still talk about 60% gross margins, but those days are over for now (JMHO). And don't tell me they will make it up with volume! Charlie. P.S. Not trying to panic anyone here -- these are just my inferences. But I am pretty fully invested at this point (no INTC)-- mostly in IRA's, or I would be short. Long-term investors in cash accounts can hang in for the eventual recovery. Those on margin on INTC have a problem to work out of, and they have to figure out the best strategy to do so.

To: Road Walker who wrote (41974)	12/11/1997 8:20:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John Fowler: re<Evidence of 1)price cuts, 2)poor product mix> 1)You said "price cuts were anticipated when Intel gave guidance..." Intel has surprised PC vendors by telling them it is to cut processor pricing early in the new year, about three weeks before the expected date, according to sources. The cuts could kick in as early as January 9, according to one PC vendor who requested anonymity. Intel declined to comment. www1.zdnet.com BTW, this scoop by zdnet.com/uk has not been picked up by Dow Jones or Reuters yet, so, even at 71 13/16, its not factored into the price. 2)You also said I'm not sure where you are getting your information about bad product mix, can you give me a reliable reference that has visibility to Intel product mix? How about this: Product......Intel Wholesale Price..Pricewatch, 4 lowest retail prices P2-300.....................738............714,714,715,719 P2-266.....................530............474,475,476,485 P2-233.....................401............348,349,350,354 P55C-166(MMX)......112............120,121,122,122 Notice that the products that Intel wants people to buy are selling in quantity 1 retail BELOW the Intel wholesale price. These dealers are probably buying these Pentium II's from computer manufactures who recognize that they can't sell as many Pentium II's as they thought they could. OTOH, the lowly 166 MMX chip is commanding a premium price. BTW, this situation (retail prices below wholesale price) did not exist three months ago. Petz