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 : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fortinwit who wrote (5945)	6/20/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 10921

Fortinwit, thank you for the weekly numbers! It must have taken considerable time to compile them. Gottfried

To: Fortinwit who wrote (5945)	6/20/1998 9:52:00 PM
From: HEXonX	Respond to of 10921

Fortinwit, you missed NMGC... HEX

To: Fortinwit who wrote (5945)	6/21/1998 2:30:00 AM
From: studdog	Respond to of 10921

thanks for the numbers. I really appreciate the fast response. Karl

To: Fortinwit who wrote (5945)	6/21/1998 11:30:00 AM
From: Gary Burton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Your efforts are much appreciated. Takes a lot of time. May I suggest a slight modification in that PSR is scrapped in favour of EPSR, the latter being (Price less 'net' cash)/Sales-----either latest qtrly annualized or ttm will do. Net cash is Cash less all LTD.------By doing that I think one is comparing apples to apples since the cash balances vary significantly between the companies and also relative to the 96 low for the same company.------For e,g, ASYT has no LTD and 50% of its stockprice is cash whereas at the 96 low only 15% was net cash. If one deducts the net cash, the EPSR now is only about a 25% or so premium over the 96 low (vs the 128% premium noted in your table) and one might even say that there is no real premium since there is a lot less risk given that cash is a much greater component of the current price than it was at the 96 low, So, one may draw a completely different conclusion than just looking at the table and saying "much more to go on the downside". Just my 2c. regards ------ps I suspect that Market Guide may be using Dec 31/97 bs numbers. If one adds 2 qtrs of eps to approximate proforma book value at June 30, ASYT is trading right at the 96 low point rather than at a 13% premium. (July 24/96 low vs book at June 30/96 per the 10Q)