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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (15533)	8/1/1998 4:26:00 AM
From: JRH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

My point is that it's over. The economic boom has reached its peek and the market is headed for a bear cycle. U.S. revises 1995-97 economic growth estimates WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New figures on the economy's performance in the mid 1990s published by the government Friday confirm what private analysts had long suspected -- growth was even more vigorous than previously thought. The Commerce Department said in its latest annual revisions of the nation's gross domestic product that the U.S. economy churned ahead during 1995-97 at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent per quarter instead of 2.9 percent. Yea, you are sure right. We are all in deep do-do now! Folks, we are going from robust Macroeconomic growth to negative macroeconomic growth in less than a year!! But it's like you guys expect to make 50 or even 30% a year from your stocks. IT'S NOT REALISTIC. I have made over 100% growth in CSCO in less than two years. As the other networkers slow, CSCO just keeps chugging along at about 30% a year, stealing market share from the other guys and increasing their margins. As the others dissappoint, they run for the blue-chip techs like CSCO. Use your common sense. If indeed the economy slows, inflows will stop. So, what you are saying is that when the economy slows, everybody will immediately cancel their 401K deductions from their paychecks and will immediately halt all investments, including IRA's? Come on, "use common sense".

To: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (15533)	8/1/1998 10:58:00 AM
From: Paul A	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

thanks for taking the time to share your wisdom with us. You made your points and im sure most appreciate it. Thank you.. now that you made your points I hope to see you on other threads. AS for the Cisco thread, everything has been said so lets move on. I have no desire to engage any further. I disagree with you and speculation is the name of the game. I have no disire to sway your opinion but I wish you the best of luck. How long have you been using the internet? I have been tele-computing since hmmm was it 1977? about 3 years before the 'war games boom'. I watched it explode year after year, and 1997 and 1998 - no exception. Coca cola? proctor gamble? my God.. what the hell are you missing?

To: SouthFloridaGuy who wrote (15533)	8/1/1998 11:32:00 PM
From: Tulvio Durand	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

... and NOT 100X PE stocks like Cisco. ...if any will go to the tried and trusted names: ..., Coca Cola, etc...and NOT 100X PE stocks like Cisco. Why are you (and others) referring to Cisco as 100X PE? Based on 95 3/4 price and last 4Q earnings (0.45, 0.43, 0.39, 0.37) I get P/E of 58. Coca Cola price 80 1/2 and last 4Q earnings (0.47, 0.34, 0.34, 0.41) equates to a PE of 52 -- not significantly different PE from that of Cisco. Using projected 5 yr growth rates of 29% for Cisco and 17% for Coca Cola the corresponding PEGs are 2.0 for Cisco and 3.1 for Coca Cola. On the basis of PEs the two are about the equal, and on the basis of PEGs Coca Cola is 50% more overpriced than is Cisco. Your statement, above, is not supportable by the data. Regards, Tulvio