To: Math Junkie who wrote (18507 ) 4/3/1998 10:01:00 PM From: Paul V. Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 70976
Richard, I really do not know what to think about AMAT's recent run up. When you compare the BTB data against last years numbers we are really down. It looks to me that we could continue to be down throughout the year when compared with last year from what I am hearing from knowledgeables. Last year for the entire year the BTB numbers were all 1.00 and above but we got smashed when AMAT was off $.01 from the month before even though the BTB #'s were greatly higher than the year before. It makes no sense except that the Big Boys just wanted to get out figuring the run up risk was greater than the downside risk. Maybe we, based on the prior pricing experiences and potentials, should be looking at what these experiences have showed us. The TA of AMAT, having broken its triple top at $38 with $39 1/2 yesterday has a probablility for profitability, according to DW, at 87.9%, with an average gain of $28.7 over 6.8 months. Hell this $28.70 added to 39.50 it make us at $68.20 and close to my prediction of $70. Again, I can not explain the run up except that the DW AMAT is based purely on Supply and Demand. The Bull Support line is at $34 with a figure of $33 to break it. The only thing I can think of is that AMAT, according to WAll Street, is taking market share and they are betting their cards that the turn around in the Pacific Rim is further along. Abby Cohen, I believe expressed Asia was futher along if I recall correctly. What what I have hearing it takes a tremendous amount of powerful semiconductors to run the laptop screens and HDTV screen and other electronic equipment coming on board. With the reduced prices of existing electronics and new electronic equipment coming out, won't their be tremendous pressure for the Semi makers, Intel, etc. to upgrade sooner rather than later. I feel for those semi makers who do not have the finances to make the upgrades since they will be lost in the dust. What are your thought, threaders? Paul V.