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: Mary Cluney who wrote (53376)	4/15/1998 3:49:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, it wasn't the Kurlak downgrade. It was the Kurlak "price target" of "60" being broadcast on CNBC just after 3:30 p.m. EST. The spread looked like 76 7/8-76 15/16 right before CNBC broadcast his new "insights". Now 15 minutes after that, we get a low bid of 74 3/4? A 1 1/8-1/4 pt. late day reversal on CNBC broadcasting a Kurlak price target. Amazing. I guess that's why both fans and naysayers call him "the best there is". I'd be really interested in knowing how CNBC came by these "insights". Did Merrill Lynch call CNBC? Or was it a client, possibly a client who had an open short position who would have a vested interest in seeing that particular "insight" be broadcast on CNBC? Good trading, Tom

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (53376)	4/15/1998 4:50:00 PM
From: Jules B. Garfunkel	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary and All, Intel's lack luster price performance today, in the face of better than expected earnings, can be attributed solely to, I believe, Tom Kurlak's SELECTIVE REPORTING and his attempt to justify his past positions. Admittedly, the man has power, however, the following should be noted. ---Tom keyed on Intel's statement that revenues would be flat to slightly down in Q2, but said nothing about Intel's frequently mentioned statement that growth would resume in the second half of 98. ---His question yesterday, on the analyst's conference call, concerned Intel's increased inventory in Q198. He was told by Intel that inventory was not out of line with expectations, and that the surge of the $125 million increase was mostly the result of purchased cartridges for Pentium IIs. Yet, he continued to report an inventory imbalance without mentioning the purchased cartridges. ---Tom, and I might say most of the other analysts on the conference call, all focused on the sub-$1,000 market. Only one analyst mentioned the coming of Merced, No one took note that yesterday SGI and IBM both seemed to through in the towel on marketing their own lower end Servers. SGI said they were re-strategizing the company to focus future sales of lower end Servers to the Enterprise market, on Intel's Deshuttes and Merced chips. (Given a preference, I would much rather have the 70% margins from this increased new market for Intel, than to continue to chase margins down by pursuing the sub-$1,000 market). Why has Kurlak ignored this? Let AMD/NSM have their 25% share of this low margin business.This segment of the business provides little to the bottom line, is laced with new user problems, and the customers for the sub- $1,000 PCs will probably trade up to an Intel PCs next time around anyway. It might also be pointed out that these unexpected new users will now require more Intel Servers be sold to service the growth of these new users, but Kurlak didn't mention that either. The market has to stop letting Tom Kurlak get away with this irresponsible reporting. As you say Mary, "Kurlak is good" at manipulating Intel's stock for his own game, but good analysis which supports his reasons for lowered expectations, he does not provide. Just my opinion as an X "Sell Side" analyst. Jules