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 : Y2K (Year 2000) Stocks: An Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DD™ who wrote (11418)	5/6/1998 10:27:00 PM
From: Craig Rogers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13949

To all: What is the problem with the Y2k stocks. Look at IMRS, Synt, CBSL, MAST, I'm sure there are many more, all hurting lately. We should be going up as time goes on don't you think? Any thoughts? Craig

To: DD™ who wrote (11418)	5/6/1998 11:02:00 PM
From: sibe	Respond to of 13949

I have a feeling this won't be the only lawsuit filed against a Y2k company for misrepresentation.

To: DD™ who wrote (11418)	5/6/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13949

Why are Y2K stocks looking so rotten? I'll take a stab(no one else has): Here's my top 10. 1. Bull market is topping out. Irrational behavior is now becoming more frequent. Insitutions may be hedging positions. 2. Although the Y2K leaders have continued to report excellent earnings, how long can the lofty PE's be justified-even for them? 3. Despite these earnings reports, no company has reported staggering increases in revenue that were expected a year ago.So, "where's the beef?" 4. The size of reported contracts are not huge, as expected. If they exist, they are not being announced. 5. Corporate spokesmen have continued to give the impression that "everything is under control," "we don't anticipate a problem,"...Andy Grove notwithstanding. 6. No corporate giant has shown earnings shortfall that can be directly attributed to Y2K issues, and none are letting on in their SEC docs that it's a big deal. 7. No public disaster or serious business interruption has emerged that can be directly attributed to Y2K. 8. There are so many companies vying for the business, no single company can be expected to emerge in a clear leadership position, even Keane Kong. 9. Even the companies that would be considered leaders are downplaying their reliance on Y2K revenue because being perceived as a purely Y2K company is death. 10. Denial. At least 8 of the above would need to change to turn things around. IMO.