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: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 9:09:00 AM
From: RDR	Respond to of 186894

From WSJ Intel INTC will offer a credible response to the budget-PC trend with a line of cheap chips, but the prospect of even lower PC prices is raising new fears about the semiconductor market. U.S. Stocks in Europe: Ford, General Motors, Intel, Microsoft London, Aug. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Following are current prices in London for shares of U.S. companies, according to Madoff Securities International Ltd. The stock symbol is in parentheses after the company name. Prices are in dollars. Intel Corp. (INTC US) dropped 1/2 to 85 1/2 following its 4 percent loss in the U.S. after Merrill Lynch & Co. analyst Tom Kurlak cut his investment rating on the world's largest chipmaker, to long-term ''neutral'' from long-term ''accumulate.'' Kurlak told investors that the company will have trouble achieving high sales growth in coming years because microprocessor prices are falling as lower-priced personal computers become popular. Nor is Intel getting higher prices for its more powerful PC chips, he said. International Business Machines Corp. (IBM US) fell 3/8 to 127 3/4. Any idea of the pre-market activity ??

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 9:32:00 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 186894

GVTucker, re: your conclusions 1. >>> Kurlak.... has also outperformed a buy-and-hold Intel shareholder, assuming that sales of Intel went to other stocks and not to cash <<< I don't quite understand what this means. If they put money into stocks that outperformed Intel then you are right, but if they put money into stocks that underperformed Intel then you would be wrong. 2. >>>The only call that could be called remotely 'wrong' is his long term rating call back in April of this year. And given that this is a long term view, not short term, the jury is still out.<<< When does the jury come in again? Does this mean that I could never be wrong if I called for the company to die? So long as the company lives the jury will be out. Mary

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 10:11:00 AM
From: Burt Masnick	Respond to of 186894

You are leaving out his timely "public reiterations" of previously announced positions.

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 11:30:00 AM
From: pete_farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: Kurlak ratings The issue is warnings, not ratings---------- Do you have the warning data?

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 11:42:00 AM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

GV, Re: "2. The only call that could be called remotely 'wrong' is his long term rating call back in April of this year. And given that this is a long term view, not short term, the jury is still out." Where is the one Paul referred to from January 1996: Then in about early 1996, after Intel had dropped from $78 (July, 1995) to $50+ he issued a sell. Intel immediately climbed from $50+ to $130 where it split in June 1996. Paul Engel, post #62960. I will add that, not only did he downgrade Intel at that time, but he called for a target price of $40. Instead, it was almost straight up to $165, not including splits, in a little over a year. NOW, THAT IS WHAT I CALL WRONG. You have a great filter that only allows Kurlak's "right" calls, which are at best 50%, like rolling the dice, to get through to your posts. This guy who hides out in New York, where chip one is NOT made, is no better than Carson's Karnak. Why doesn't he come out to Silicon Valley (or Texas) and see the bricks and mortar of the companies he pretends to know. He reminds me of Soundview's Whittington of bygone times, who also made all his calls from back there (Stamford CT), and knew nothing about this business. Where is he today? Tony

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 12:02:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

How can data on Kurlak be proprietary data? If I go back and get intels stock price on these dates how much will you pay me for this proprietary data? Jim

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/21/1998 12:20:00 PM
From: Len Roselli	Respond to of 186894

Thread, The problem with Kurlak, or any other analyst, is that he bases his predictions on current trends which he believes will continue into the future. His latest Intel downgrade is based on events that are expected to play out in the next three years (i.e., declining ASPs for processor chips.) This kind of analysis is OK if the future follows his game plan. But what are the chances of that happening? Here are some events that I believe makes his prediction worthless, or at least worth exactly what it is--an easy way to make a living by claiming to know what is unknowable. 1. New markets are created for processors (and other semi-products) with higher margins. This, of course, is already happening in the server market, and Intel is positioning itself to be the major player. 2. New applications that require higher processor performance become popular, leading to an upgrade cycle. People that believe we have enough horsepower with present CPUs simply have no vision. I can think of two application areas that will require CPU and memory upgrades when they hit the mainstream: Voice Recognition and real-time 3-D visualization. And, of course, the game market never has enough horsepower. 3. Worldwide market expansion of information devices (fueled by the Internet). I don't see this trend slowing down until the entire world is connected. (Even nations that cling to Medieval values use and respect computing and information devices.) 4. A technology break-through that significantly reduces manufacturing costs and/or creates a new product line. Copper metalization comes to mind. Admittedly, Intel's competitors would also benefit, but having the largest segment of the market means that Intel would benefit the most. 5. Intel's competitors continue to lose money and decide to throw in the towel, although I believe Sanders would make a pact with the Devil (to save AMD) rather than admit defeat. 6. Other events that I can't think of now. Conclusion: Kurlak can't predict the future any better than you or I, and the fact that he has "handlers" renders whatever predictions he makes suspect. Think for yourself! len

To: GVTucker who wrote (62963)	8/22/1998 9:20:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

GV - Thanks for Your Kurlak Data - It VERIFIES MY ASSERTION Look at Kurlak's calls - and his REVERSALS: 29 Jun 94 lowered to 3-1 14.9375 446.05 21 Dec 94 raised to 1-1 15.375 457.24 Net result - Intel ROSE $0.40 and Kurlak had to REVERSE HIMSELF WRONG CALL TO LOWER 19 Jul 95 lowered to 2-1 32.5 556.58 6 Oct 95 raised to 1-1 31.5625 582.63 Net result - Intel dropped only $1 - Brokerage expenses would eat up most of the sell and re-purchase of Intel. 7 Nov 95 lowered to 3-1 34.4375 588.46 31 May 96 raised to 1-1 36.9375 671.70 Net Result - WRONG CALL - Intel INCREASED $2.50 per share 22 Aug 97 lowered to 3-1 92.25 925.05 One good Call 15 Apr 98 lowered to 3-2 78.1875 1115.75 20 Aug 98 lowered to 3-3 87 1098.06 Kurlak BLEW IT - WRONG CALL - Sellers would have lost $9 in the Intel run up following his advice. From your SELECT data, Kurlak provided one good call and three BAD ones - based on the subsequent response in Intel's stock AFTER the Kurlak call. Why didn't you include this following call, GV ? You seem to focus only on "select" calls that you think will support your argument? This time, Kurlak issued a BULL analysis on Intel, May 7, 1997, just 2 weeks before Intel issued an earnings warning - and the stock dropped $10 to $15 in one day. What do the Kurlak reports contain that you didn't publish? {==============================} Tech Stocks Rise on Boost From Merrill Lynch (5/7) By MARGARET D. WILLIAMS c.1997 Bloomberg News EW YORK -- Technology stocks rose Wednesday after several Merrill Lynch analysts said demand for semiconductors, computers and software remains strong. ''The Merrill technology team came out positive this morning and it looks like it's lifted the stocks,'' said Mike Driscoll, senior block trader at Hambrecht & Quist. Shares of Compaq Computer Corp. rose 2 1/4 to 92 1/4; Texas Instruments Inc. rose 1 7/8 to 93 7/8; Motorola Inc. rose 3/8 to 61 3/8; and Dell Computer Inc. rose 1 5/8 to 91 7/8. The Merrill Lynch technology analysts and chief investment strategist spoke to institutional investors on a conference call earlier Wednesday. Analyst Tom Kurlak told clients that Intel Corp., which was up 2 to 160 earlier, will benefit from a shift to production of more MMX products, which are the new chips that include multimedia features. ''They are ahead of schedule,'' Kurlak said, adding that he expects 75 percent of the chipmaker's production to be MMX chips by the end of June. ''He thinks they are setting up for a huge second half,'' said Peter Williams of L.B. Burtschy & Co., who was on the call. Kurlak also said the reported flaw in the Pentium II and Pentium Pro chips probably will have a software fix soon and won't hurt sales. Kurlak also recommended the stocks of U.S. memory chip makers Micron Technology Inc. and Texas Instruments. He said Micron is boosting its production of chips and that prices for memory chips are stabilizing. ''Demand for memory is very strong,'' Kurlak said. Merrill analyst Lucianne Painter said on the call that personal computer makers will benefit from a strong corporate upgrade cycle with new Intel chips and Microsoft Corp. software. She said direct vendors will do especially well, and that Compaq's stock is the best value in the group. (The Bloomberg web site is at bloomberg.com ) NYT-05-07-97 1818EDT< {=====================================} The net result is that Kurlak is no better than flipping a coin - listening to him would result in extreme jeopardy. Nearly every downgrade has been followed by an UPGRADE - indicating his PRIOR DOWNGRADE WAS WRONG ! Tax consequences of selling on his calls, paying brokerage fees and short term capital gains tax will eat up ANY MINOR SHORT TERM SAVINGS and this would be followwed by "PAPER LOSSES" as Intel's stock increased in value BEFORE Kurlak recommended buying it again. If someone had SOLD Intel in June 1994, on Kurlak's advice, for $14+, they would have missed out on a 600% GAIN in Intel to $84+ today, not to mention what they would have lost in tax consequences. I'll bet those folks just love old Tommy the ex-banker. Listening to Kurlak is a fool's game. Kurlak is no more than a numbers analyzer, sitting in an over stuffed Wall STreet office. His only contribution is to try to generate trading profits for Merrill Lynch by his rapid downgrade/upgrade cycles of Intel. He clearly cannot focus out beyond a 6 month window because he nearly always REVERSES HIS INTEL CALLS within 6 months. Intel is a national treasure - providing 60,000+ jobs - creating wealth, improving the quality of life in the world through its designs and manufacturing of the best CPUs and support circuits in the world. In 10 years, Kurlak will have been replaced by 2 or 3 other analysts, and no one will remember him for anything other than leaching off the backs of real producers in America. In 10 years, Intel will more than likely be bigger, stronger and vastly more successful than today - as will its shareholders. Paul