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: Jules V who wrote (60825)	7/19/1998 5:17:00 PM
From: Fred Fahmy	Respond to of 186894

Jules, <but he called things lately way better than most around here.> I don't know what you call "lately" but his Q1 EPS estimate was about 30% low.....a total embarrassment if you ask me. FF

To: Jules V who wrote (60825)	7/19/1998 5:45:00 PM
From: Dale J.	Respond to of 186894

Jules, As for Kurlack, he obviously has not made all the right calls all the time, but he called things lately way better than most around here. That's all. There is a saying: "If you want to be right. Predict often and predict widely." That is the analyst's game. Paul however, has been clear, he thinks Intel is a good buy for the long-term. He has been crystal clear and unwavering. If you had bought INTC stock at any point and held for more than 3 years, you have done fabulously well in those three years. Period. Better than listening to any analyst. BTW: I predicted 85, Kurlack predicted 60. Message 5006886 But it doesn't matter, the financial rags ordained Kurlack as a guru, so I guess that makes him right. Dale

To: Jules V who wrote (60825)	7/19/1998 6:03:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Jules - Re: "That's all. For one so critical, compare your own predictions as an analyst of sorts, there have been some big reversals. " I don't predict what Intel's stock is going to be on any given day. Likewise, I don't claim - and never have claimed - that Intel's stock is always going to go up and not go down. My focus has always been to assess Intel's technology and decide if that technology will translate to dominant products. Dominant products eventually translate to future growth. Kurlak - who I'll admit can swing Intel's stock up or down - tries to predict short term changes in Intel's stock valuation. He has made correct calls and incorrect calls. On average, "traders" following his advice would probably break even over the long haul following his whip-saw prognostications. Merrill Lynch, on the other hand, makes money whether or not their customers make money. On the other hand, long term investors in Intel have regularly been rewarded for their patience. And they don't have to reward Merrill Lynch (or any other broker) with each change in mind-set that Kurlak happens to put forth on any given day. Paul

To: Jules V who wrote (60825)	7/21/1998 9:24:00 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 186894

Jules, >>>As for Kurlack, he obviously has not made all the right calls all the time, but he called things lately way better than most around here<<< FYI: nytimes.com >>>July 21, 1998 Investing by the Numbers Doesn't Offer a Great Edge By JOSEPH KAHN NEW YORK -- Put some of the world's smartest math scholars together with the fastest computers. Give them a wealth of historical data and a few billion dollars. Do they have a chance of predicting swings in the stock market? David Shaw, a computer-science professor turned Wall Street trader, believes that his chances are not much better than the odds of picking red or black correctly in roulette. Shaw has all the tools at his disposal -- the brains, the computers, the data and the money. But each time his secret algorithms spot a buy or sell opportunity in stocks or bonds, he figures his chances of making money are only marginally better than if he flips a coin. ......... <<< My point is that I don't believe Kurlak has any methodology in what he does. We do know that he has been right on some calls in the past and he has been wrong on others. His past record on calls (as far as I know) have not been quantified - and perhaps it is not anything that is easily quantifiable. My conclusion is that his reputation is based primarily on salesmanship and hype. Yet what he says has enormous impact on Intel valuation - long term and short term. What he does really well is to manipulate sentiment. He could have been even more successful had he chosen to become a political spinmeister. You would think that people with large amounts of other people's money to invest would be immune from Kurlak's type of spin. Mary