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 Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maverick who wrote (31516)	4/8/1998 5:31:00 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571135

Maverick, All - pru report this one is full of optimism relative to the others so be warned: exchange2000.com Maverick, I am also confused about "no ibm" deal that many analysts concluded from CC. While I am not sure if there is one or there is not it was hard for me to determine anything from CC one way or another. If the deal is at works then Jerry would probably behave just as he did at the conference. Personally, I would prefer deal with Seimann that was also rumored recently. That one could do wonders for AMD. Jerry downplayed the importance of financing which was a lie since 300M debt is due soon, if I remember it correctly, on top of all retooling etc. Regards -Albert

To: Maverick who wrote (31516)	4/8/1998 6:07:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571135

Two analysts with different views, why? In post 31515: Edelstone said he raised his 1998 earnings estimates on AMD to a profit of $0.40 a share profit, up from break-even previously. In post 31516: S&P equity analyst Megan Graham-Hackett lowered her 1998 earnings per share estimate for Advanced Micro Devices (NYSE: AMD - news) to a loss after the company reported a wider than expected first quarter loss. Edelstone was at the conference call and asked the last question. He asked about the tax rate assumed for the tax credit. The answer given by AMD, according to my notes was, "We moderated the credit taken this quarter so that we don't get an inordinate tax rate in 2h'99." First, Edelstone knew that if profits in second half were less than losses in first half, the tax rate would NOT be 'inordinate.' (In fact, it would be less than 38%, which is less than GAAP standard.) Next, he looked at the magnitude of the reduction in tax rate (38% vs 63% in 4Q'97) and he knew that this was a clue that AMD expected substantial overall profits for the year. (http://www.techstocks.com/~wsapi/investor/reply?s=credit+tax+amd&sreply=4002839) Very clever question and clever analyst, IMHO. Megan Graham-Hackett, the S&P analyst who now expects a loss, OTOH, did not participate in the CC. Petz