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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shane forbes who wrote (12759)	6/2/1998 9:29:00 AM
From: Wolf 2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Shane: Warning to others: Do yourselves a favor and DON'T read the WSJ, Barron's or any other financial news publications in the next few weeks, DON'T watch Bloomberg, Wall Street Week; DON'T listen to experts, attend conferences etc etc - like consensus opinions at an approaching low point they will be filled with irrational fear saying (as Briefing implies) to NEVER buy entire sectors again and thereby cause you to sell at precisely the wrong times to try and move into the higher priced sectors... Morons and Dopes they will always be...(JMHO) Well said! One small point of disagreement: the Dopes and Morons are not those who voice these opinions (they're getting paid!) but rather those who buy into them...again and again ad nauseum. You've really got to wonder why the investing public gives any credence to 'experts' who, in a matter of months, go from characterizing an industry as 'cutting edge' to 'buggy whip manufacturer.' Bah, Humbug! Regards, Wolf

To: shane forbes who wrote (12759)	6/2/1998 10:01:00 AM
From: Beachbumm	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Some talking head on TeeVee said that Merced delay was due to INTC shifting numbers of engineers to crunch on a low-end PC chip when it belatedly realized that this segment was gangbusters and INTC wasn't there. Take it FWIW. Beachbumm

To: shane forbes who wrote (12759)	6/2/1998 6:43:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Shane, I agree that an earnings warning out of Intel would be the straw that breaks the camel's back. About the delay in Merced, FWIW, an Intel spokesman finally came out because he didn't like the way some of the speculation was going. Naturally, he saw it my way, gg, (actually, I believed CEO Barrett, but a lot of Intellites didn't): To: rich evans (56626 ) From: John Hull Tuesday, Jun 2 1998 11:00AM ET Reply # of 56717 Rich, this theory is going down the wrong path. Craig Barrett is correct and Tony V. and Paul E. both touch on simialr themes of process complexity, program management and interdependencies. Stay on that course. Manufacturing/Production is not an issue. Architecture is not an issue. Let's all be rational on this subject, there's nothing here that belongs in a good suspense novel. Its not easy work, but Intel will get it done. Regards, jh Again, FWIW, a scheduling problem is better news than an architectural, or technology or manufacturing problem. Is LSI poised for another leg up on it's sawtooth waveform chart? Tony

To: shane forbes who wrote (12759)	6/2/1998 8:17:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Shane, your don't read WSJ, Barron's, etc....rant, I agree completely. My all time least favorite is NBR, with Paul Kangais. Nothing against him personally, of course, but to him, high tech is railroads and pasteurized milk. I have to admit, ol' Tom Kurlak called this one, but he's also been very wrong before. Some think that if/when Intel bottoms to the 60 range, he'll jump in with BUY calls on semiconductors again. Watch INTC. I personally think INTC has too much buoyancy to get to 60, but what do I know. LSI seems to be acting like the cat that swallowed the canary about being a lot out of PCs. What happens when PCs start up again? Actually, PCs may be down for a while, but powerful internet and other application NT servers are hot. These will lead INTC and the SOX out of the doldrums. Tony