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 (48311)	2/20/1998 9:12:00 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul: Off Topic I have a position in Qualcomm and I remember before that you do, too. Could QCOM be seen as the AMD of wireless since their competitors are so much bigger than them and are able to push an older standard (TDMA)? What is your opinion? Thanks, dave

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48311)	2/20/1998 9:27:00 PM
From: MyStoxGoUp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Kurlak and stock price manipulation. On options expiration day of Jan '98 Kurlak vehemently downgraded MU and even said that the stock was worth $22 when the stock was selling for ~$32 that day.Such a strong downgrade,with a downside price target,on a crucial day with a stock 2 points in the money at a strike that Kurlak obviously wanted to expire worthless on smells fishy to me.Coulple this with some other downgrades that had a minimal effect on the semi market-and I think Kurlak has lost some of his shine. I might sound paranoid,but really think about it. Phil

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48311)	2/20/1998 9:28:00 PM
From: Jay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul Re "Kurlak come off saying that existing chips are powerful enough?" FWIW - we got a couple of PII-333's at work a couple of weeks ago. The first few days we oohed and aahed over the new found speed. Today I heard the guy using one complaining that the darn thing was too slow!!!

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48311)	2/20/1998 10:23:00 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, so true, and what these so called analyst don't seem to fully understand is the GAP is widening! As Intel adds billions and billions to it's bottom line these guys are bleeding money. Hope is one thing, making money is what a business is all about. The next generation of plants and equipment to compete with Intel is getting VERY expensive. Intel announces almost with a ho-hum a 2 billion dollar new plant. To almost any other company in the world that would be the investment of a lifetime. To Intel a bi-yearly expectation. Similar to Boeing, the COST to compete with Intel now out of reach of nearly everyone. (Unless of course you count a government consortium.) I'm sure Fuchi would be all for the Justice Department mandating a government consortium. :-) Michael

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48311)	2/21/1998 2:38:00 PM
From: Gary G. Withrow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, How important is level II cache to the Covington now that SDRAM is at 10 nsec? That's faster than the cache on my 486 (20 nsec). Gary

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48311)	2/23/1998 7:36:00 PM
From: Harry Landsiedel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul Engel. Re: Computers/VCRS. Kurlak's greatest failure IMHO is comparing PC's to VCR's. PC's are significantly different on several dimensions. 1. Speed matters. A faster VCR is meaningless. Not so with a PC. People with a slower PC accept it, 'cause they know no better. That's 'til they upgrade the 1st time. Then they're hooked on more speed is better. 2. PC's are two-way communicators. The VCR is a one-way machine. A PC enables a dialogue. It's inherently more valuable as a "tool" 3. PC's are multi-dimensional. You can use PC's for lots of things. (Remember your tool analogy). That means a persons PC GROWs in importance as the user finds new uses for this tool. And these uses are expanding and will continue to expand. Not so with the VCR. It's function, like TV's has been essentially unchanged in 50 years. 4. PC's are personal. Not enough is made of this factor in fueling the PC boom. Because is a PERSONAL productivity tool, people are more involved in PC's and hence willing to pay more for them and upgrade them more often. A VCR is not personal. 5. Faster PC's improve productivity. With 75%-80% of the PC's going to business, more productivity is a key factor fueling the upgrade phenomonon. Look at how low unemployment is. In the U.S. managers are opting to upgrade PC's to get more out of their current workforce rather than pay more to hire more people. That's why as unemployment drops capital spending goes up. Any economist will tell you that that higher prices (on labor) will encourage managers to replace those "inputs" with lower priced ones (cheaper computers). It's a virtuous cycle. It is Wall St's failure to understand the PC phenomonon that has enabled investors like us to buy these companies cheap and watch them grow. It amazes me that these supposed smart people (like Peter Lynch) do not look at these companies as superb marketing machines. They get dazzled by the mumbo-jumbo of the technology and cannot see how they satisfy consumer needs, just like Coca Cola, Gillette and other more established franchises. Amazing but profitable for us. HL