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 : Adobe (adbe) opinions -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuck. Edwards who wrote (2055)	12/19/1997 9:01:00 AM
From: Mark Palmberg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3111

<<Analysts aren't that stupid, and my memory isn't that short.>> I don't know about your memory, Chuck, but most of the crap I've seen analysts pull in this market over just the last year makes Jethro Clampet look like a sage. <<But it really doesn't make sense to beat up the market for not recognizing Adobe's great earnings momentum, when it doesn't currently have any.>> Try to make a short list of the reasons why Adobe doesn't(?) have great earnings momentum and see if 'The Market' isn't on it. Since you have a relatively good memory you'll be able to flip back through the archives and note that ADBE has been a fairly consistent contrarian issue over the past six months -- up into a down market, down during strong bull runs. Whatever kind of subterfuge Adobe's top dogs are running right now with regards to their earnings is tremendously preferable to what just happened with Oracle (for instance). In any case, Adobe still appears to me to be strong fundamentally, and I am most impressed with the steps the executives are constantly taking to keep this huge company repsonsive to both investors and customers. Good luck to you today, Chuck. Looks like it could be a bloody one. Mark

To: Chuck. Edwards who wrote (2055)	12/19/1997 12:49:00 PM
From: James M. Bash	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3111

...So you're saying the company missed the original earnings estimates of 59 cents by 3 cents, or 5%. OK, fair enough. But since then, the stock has gone from $48 to ~$35, or down 27%. Doesn't that strike you as a wee bit of overkill?

To: Chuck. Edwards who wrote (2055)	12/19/1997 2:13:00 PM
From: Arnold Layne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3111

Estimates for November quarter from first call: Current Mean 0.55 7-days ago Mean 0.55 30-days ago Mean 0.57 60-days ago Mean 0.56 90-days ago Mean 0.54

To: Chuck. Edwards who wrote (2055)	12/20/1997 12:14:00 AM
From: Chuck. Edwards	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3111

To Mark Palmberg: All I was objecting to was your criticism (and that of Evan Balter) of analysts for not giving Adobe proper credit for beating estimates. The analysts have been consistently friendly, and they have given Adobe all the credit it deserves. Remember, Adobe plunged a month ago because it fell short of OVER-OPTIMISTIC projections by analysts. Believe it or not, analysts do try to get earnings right -- their mistake was that they were TOO friendly, and TOO enthusiastic. The fruit of their friendly attitude was a 33 percent haircut and the opportunity to look stupid in front of their peers. If you want to whine about something, whine about Adobe's failure to meet the high expectations of its friends a month ago. Don't whine about analysts' failure to meet give Adobe proper credit -- they did. And Adobe fell short. In fact, I personally don't think Adobe, or any other business, owes anything to any analyst -- they just owe their shareholders a dedicated effort to make the business prosper. But they have chosen to manage earnings expectations in the marketplace, and you and other investors have chosen to play the earnings expectations game. If you are going to do this, at least be consistent -- and don't complain when others have a memory that goes back all of one month. I like the company, and I like their software. I just happen to think that the fall in the stock is entirely rational, and is not the result of any conspiracy by unfriendly analysts, hostile foreign factions, or El Nino. I tend to agree with such previous posters as Pete Mason and earthling that the stock is no more than fairly priced and is possibly underpriced at these levels. Cheers Chuck Edwards