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 (50088)	3/7/1998 5:07:00 PM
From: RumKola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul As a newcomer to this thread, although a long term INTC investor, sure does seem that you have a lot of good sense. Please keep the messages coming. JDP

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 5:12:00 PM
From: Ian Davidson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Interesting interview with Craig Barret: zdnet.com Ian

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 6:04:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, RE:" I believe Compaq's problem is quite simple. COMPAQ almost single handedly ENDORSED, EMBRACED, and STARTED the sub $1000 PC bonanza with their choice of the cheap Cyrix MediaGX machine back in February of 1997. Once they started it, everybody jumped on the bandwagon, offering similar machines - although most were Intel based. When AMD put out their K6 and Intel responded with immediate price cuts, the race was on to sell anything and everything at the stampede prices approaching $1,000." That's true. As I told someone back then, it's the demand that will drive the market. Now that the demand for cheaper computers is on a roll there is no stopping it. Looks like price is determining the market... Just as it should... Jim

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 10:28:00 PM
From: Jorge	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul....Your post ended up on the DELL thread and I thought I would answer this CPQ statement........Pfeiffer, I'm afraid, will try to hit the corporate arena with bargain basement pricing also......I'd really like to think DELL won't succumb to this cesspool of cutthroat competition and end up losing money like CPQ is doing..........George

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 10:44:00 PM
From: Sabrejet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, in the past I have disagreed with a few of your posts among other things but my apologies! Your analysis of CPQ's business model was quite accurate in it's logic. We may never know the actual stream of events in the war room at CPQ but someone will get fired big time on this one and it may be the bossman himself. Let me be the first one to make that call. Keep posting! seczebra

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 10:53:00 PM
From: steve h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, re:>>compaq<< can they recover? Will the Dec merger hurt or help them? steve h

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/7/1998 11:34:00 PM
From: G.M. Flinn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, your CPQ analysis is right on the mark. Best explanation I have seen posted, and similar to what many of us have been posting and/or thinking. Two Questions: 1) DELL seems to be the only remaining pure play, with a unique, profitable strategy focused on the high end of PC capabilities ... arguably the best "value" when balancing price (usually lower), timeliness and purchasing ease, i.e. minimal brain pain. Will or can CPQ go after DELL's high end stronghold with a one-time fire sale? I pose the "can" because I do not think CPQ's cost structure will allow it. Should CPQ sell a nearly identical machine to DELL it will either make less money or lose money. I also have to believe that more sophisticated buyers (consumer 2nd and 3rd time, corporate, government) are not likely to radically alter buying patterns to save 1% or so on a one-time basis. Your thoughts? Has CPQ seriously damaged itself for some time to come? 2) If I were AMD I would literally be %$@tting bricks that INTC is moving downstream rapidly. Does this move literally slice computers into two sectors ... a) cheap, works well with today's technology and b) leading-edge / more powerful to handle future software and technology? I see little in between.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50088)	3/8/1998 1:19:00 PM
From: Jules B. Garfunkel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Excellent assessment Paul, If you remember my e-mail to you last Wednesday, "Does it seem to you to be coincidental that the only two major OEM suppliers, to have reported inventory buildups yesterday were CPQ and IBM. Can we read anything into this?" I was alluding to the fact that these 2 OEMs were among the select few to endorse AMD and Cyrix products. I still think that the major reason for these two company's announced inventory buildups is because of the difficulty in supporting multiple chip vendors. Unfortunately, it looks like Intel, in Q1, went along for the ride. I posted my assessment of the Intel earning's shortfall announcement on Thursday, on the INTC thread. You might want to check it out. Message 3612451 Regards, Jules