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 : Applied Magnetics Corp -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T Bowl who wrote (11029)	12/16/1997 5:22:00 PM
From: Dave Chanoux	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12298

From the 10-23-97 press release: Capital expenditures for the year ended September 27, 1997, were $96.1 million. Picking a nit: Loss per share should be based on the 23 million outstanding shares (approximatley) rather than the 31 million fully diluted shares. As usual, I don't believe any of it. Regards, Dave Chanoux

To: T Bowl who wrote (11029)	12/16/1997 5:43:00 PM
From: Jonathan Bird	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12298

Jon Bird - I think this means book value would go down right? Yes of course, if they are looseing money then book value will go down. But my 130%*BV target was for what I expected to be a .10 profit this quarter. We will go below current book value now I am sure. I'll have to check the charts and figures again to get any good idea. APM is the red headed step child of the DD. They will be shown no mercy by the street. I wish you had told me about the earnings revisions before the close and I would have shorted some more. Shares may be hard to come by very soon. I checked my source for First Call estimates when I read your post and they had not been updated. Hopefuly there will still be time before the info is diseminated. I have been a major APM bear but even I didn't think things would get this bad. It has reached all my downside targets ahead of schedule so I considered that something might worse then I expected. But I thought it was just the bad sector outlook and tech weakness. Obviously there is more to it. Thanks for the info. Jon Bird