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 : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mason Barge who wrote (6803)	8/27/1998 7:11:00 PM
From: Stitch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Mason, Thread; <<Personally, when I see book below 1.2 to 1.5 (depending on the sector), I start looking at it as a negative, or at least a red flag. This is just a word of warning for virgins -- if you've never had a stock go to $0, you might not fully appreciate just how possible a 100% loss is.>> Wise words. In your next post you mention the potential value of TER saying <<Are you holding Teradyne? What do you think? It's down to 18 1/2, YUMM! I really like it at this price>> FWIW here is an opinion in SmartMoney this evening: excerpted from "FEAR AND LOATHING IN THE TECH SECTOR" reprinted for personal use only: It's hard to argue that pummeled sectors like chip equipment are overvalued. After all, the group came down 8% on Thursday. And of the 36 equipment companies tracked by Zacks Investment Research, 15 are now trading below book value -- quality companies like LAM Research (LRCX) and Mattson Technology (MTSN) among them. But Mark Fitzgerald, who follows the semiconductor capital equipment sector for Merrill Lynch, says there's no point in bottom fishing now. Until the PC market recovers, he says, chip equipment stocks are going nowhere. And PC prospects are less than rosy. He expects that the holiday boost in PC sales will be short-lived, and that companies like Dell Computer (DELL) are growing primarily by stealing share in certain markets, while the market itself is not growing at all. "NEC and some other firms have lost significant share in Asian markets [to Dell]," Fitzgerald says. I agree with Fitzgerald's comments about the short lived boost from holiday spending and had always felt the turn around would be based on Corporate spending beginning in Q1,99. There is considerable debate whether Y2k will spur or depress that spending. I vote that it will spur it. BTWTHDIK Best, Stitch

To: Mason Barge who wrote (6803)	8/28/1998 12:16:00 PM
From: Robert Douglas	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10921

Mason, You wrote: Personally, when I see book below 1.2 to 1.5 (depending on the sector), I start looking at it as a negative, or at least a red flag. This is just a word of warning for virgins -- if you've never had a stock go to $0, you might not fully appreciate just how possible a 100% loss is. From a non-virgin's perspective. Believe it or not book value once meant something. It was as recent as 1982 that the S & P Industrials sold below one times book value. There is certainly no argument about what a buy signal that was! Book value is of course only a crude attempt to determine what is really valuable, which is replacement cost. The reason book value means so little when talking about companies involved with rapidly changing technologies is that there is no sense in replacing something with no economic value despite its' accounting value on the companies books. In other words, who is going to replace something with no use. -Robert