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: Mary Cluney who wrote (61297)	7/28/1998 9:42:00 AM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

>> Or is it that the tail was wagging the dog? Meaning he is so influential that he is in part the cause of the stock not doing anything. << Sorry but some of you guys/gals sound like your emotionally attached to this company. Kurlack didn't make INTC miss their earnings about 5 times in the last couple of years. Kurlack didn't make Intel's earnings DECLINE over the last few quaters. INTC has done nothing because their earnings have done nothing. I don't see what that has to do with Kurlack.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (61297)	7/28/1998 10:31:00 AM
From: Joseph Pareti	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

>Maybe, now, Craig Barrett is going to try and do >something to keep the Kurlaks >from depressing the stock. can you explain what "something' means. >Meaning he is so influential that he is > in part the cause of the stock not doing anything. there is a lot of money you can make on a cyclical stock, if YOU KNOW that it's going to be bashed at 90 bucks or so. The acid test of one's confidence in INTEL is whether one buys in the mid60's. BTW Kurlak spoke last week but the ripple effect was considerably smaller than with the previous calls (again, does anybody have the research report ?)