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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: akidron who wrote (17564)	3/12/1998 1:35:00 AM
From: Steve Rolfe	Respond to of 70976

Aki, I stated "for a couple of quarters" not the whole year and was just trying to illustrate a point. However, if they did in fact lose 10% of revs and we used last quarters numbers as a guide. Net sales of $1.31 billion Net income of $228.9 million 1.31 billion x 10%(Japan and SEA's % of new orders x 1/2) = 131 million Even if you say this was 100% profit, which you cannot, AMAT still would have had net income around 100 million(229-131). This does not look like a loss to me. Please back up your posts with numbers when you make statements like "this is just plain wrong" or please use statements like "I don't think this is correct ..." and then somebody can crunch the numbers. Steve

To: akidron who wrote (17564)	3/12/1998 9:27:00 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

aki, Re:my best guess is that intc cuts capex next q because the easiest way to restore margins Do you even follow the techs?? INTC does not have a history of taking the foot off of the pedal to temporarily improve margins. They don't play the qtr. to qtr. game WS plays. They are like sharks; when they smell blood in the water they will attack. Now that AMD may not have the resources, look for them to increase their capex. BTW, I believe this was what they said in their last statement. BK