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: Thomas M. who wrote (64498)	9/11/1998 3:18:00 PM
From: Joey Smith	Respond to of 186894

re:Wall Street, however, is focusing on the positive, and is choosing to ignore why third-quarter revenues and earnings will be higher than expected. During the second quarter, indirect corporate PC suppliers, such as Compaq and Hewlett-Packard, worked hard to clear their channels and inventories--while on the retail end, consumers postponed their purchases until late June to coincide with the launch of the new Windows 98 operating system. Funny how these Bears didn't mention the temporary and transitional effect the inventory correction would have on Intel revenue during Q4-Q2 when Intel shares were getting killed...but now they use it as a reason why Intel sales are so strong...Good to see that the market isn't buying this BS. joey

To: Thomas M. who wrote (64498)	9/11/1998 3:19:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Thomas, your article is flawed. The author is also very unoriginal. The one glaring error (not that there aren't others) is: The direction for all remaining line items (gross margin, depreciation, tax rate, and capital spending) remains the same. Intel said gross margins were looking to be up a couple of percentage points in 3Q vs. 2Q. In general, the article is another of the type that, no matter what Intel says or does, someone will take negative spins on all of it. Sh*t, I could do that. That's what I meant by saying that the author is being very unoriginal. This is kind of like, when McGwire broke the home run record, some started to say 'yeah, but should he be voted MVP?' Who cares? Can't these fools take an event or a report without turning themselves inside out looking for negative crap to dump on it? Tony