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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul V. who wrote (21241)	7/9/1998 12:10:00 AM
From: Dr. Bob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Paul and all, Some random thoughts, touched off by Paul's comment: and echoing ideas many of you have mentioned. The tide will not switch until 1) Overcapacity situation is corrected AND 2) 300 mm tools are ready. Chip manufacturers will have to show that they can make a profit to get financing for equipt; govt subsidies will be hard to come by for awhile. That won't happen until the glut is corrected, and that won't happen until mid-99, according to many accounts. Even then, increased capacity will be accomplished largely by retrofitting, rather than new fab construction for awhile (what's the chances anyone is going to build a new 200 mm fab?), so major revenue increases won't occur until 2000. This means we have at least 6 more months of pain (except for skilled traders). Those who want to buy and hold should either wait for a better price (at least mid-20's), or a better time (late 98), IMO. The idea that one shouldn't try to time the bottom in a stock which will be quadrupling in the next 3-5 years has merit only if there is some risk to waiting. IMO, there isn't a chance for this sector to take off for another 6 months (or longer), so there is no risk to waiting. The contrarian view is that the time to buy is when everything looks bleak, but sometimes, things really ARE bleak! If you just must play this sector right now, there are better vehicles, IMO, including ETEC and TER. Bob

To: Paul V. who wrote (21241)	7/9/1998 12:34:00 AM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Paul, you said >A reversal of three hold numbers is required for a reversal either up or down. A typo? You meant to type whole ? I am close to your thinking re AMAT. It has been said "pigs get slaughtered", i.e. people who hold on to a stock too long hoping for even bigger gains. It is possible to be a pig waiting for an even lower entry price as well. This is no criticism of those threaders who seem to know what they're doing. But for those - like me - who are not so sure, it might be better to keep their eye on the 26 resistance line. I also agree with aki that nothing much has changed during his absence. GM And thanks for the bullish % numbers.

To: Paul V. who wrote (21241)	7/9/1998 4:20:00 AM
From: Rick	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 70976

Paul V. - You can put your bags in the luggage storage and relax. The inbound train your waiting for is MIA. You can either wait for the train or choose a new destination - that would be my approach. It's a fools game to try to pick the bottom. If you really think it has upside to 100, it would seem that it would make a whole lot more sense to wait for some indication of improving conditions - surely it's not going to gap up to 100 and cause you to miss the ride. I think you're talking yourself into holding onto a poor performer. Cut your losses and move to something with growth potential over the next year. These cyclicals always fall alot more than you think, just as they rise too high during good times. How many people thought the disk drive makers were a good buy as they declined up to 80% ? Sure, AMAT is going to be back, but it's just a pipe dream to think it's going to be a good performer in the next year. If your horizon is beyond a year then maybe it can be justified - the problem, of course, is that the market demands near term performance, so this is dead money at best and another 50% decline is not out of the question. Rick.