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 : Semtech (Nasdaq:SMTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert G. Harrell who wrote (600)	9/14/1998 11:31:00 PM
From: Jeff Bond	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1225

That price chart is more and more beginning to look like a cup and handle to this amateuer. If we witness more up days in the upcoming two weeks, then we may be back at prior price levels we all can appreciate. If the cup and handle leads to a nice run up soon, it should stick instead of dropping back off. If the price goes sideways, then it's pretty uncertain where we're headed. Any thoughts on this recent run? Is the price going up because of a potential acquisition, expectations for resoundingly thumping earnings estimates, anticipation of increasing revenues, increased perception that SMTC is becoming an industry leader, or is it just the phase of the moon? The rule sure seems simple: pick a winner, and ignoring an urge to sell in times of meltdown, buy more whenever you have the opportunity. Most of my curiosity centers around institutional buying, who is buying it, what percentage of ownership do they have, and what is total current institutional sponsership. I think CB Lee, Arun Veerpan, Doug Lee, and Robert Montague cover this company very well, but I am less certain on Bill Kitchel with Greenville Capital Management. If Greenville is again accumulating shares, understand that they are one of the primary instigators in bringing the share price down, as they began a wholesale dumping of their position just prior to last falls plunge. In all fairness, maybe they should be watched, since their timing seems pretty good. If there is one other gripe I have, it's that BA Robert Stephenson cannot make up their minds on SMTC, having initiated coverage in February 1998, upgraded estimates in March, then dropped them back down in July. Uh, gentlemen, can we please make up our minds? I'm only pointing out that their uncertainty makes for more uncertainty in the price of the stock. However, I would consider it deceitful if I found out that BA Robert Stephenson has been accumulating shares since they downgraded the company in July. That would not be in good form, since it proves that analyst estimates are not tied to how they invest their own money. The only question remaining then becomes, just exactly WHO are they making all these predictions and ratings for? It couldn't be for the purpose of providing true guidance for investors could it, since they do not follow their own estimates? Isn't that a very interesting question, at least for me it is? I am going to look at institutional sponsership very closely this upcoming quarter, since I am well aware of how much it affects the price of the stock. Come November, we will all know how our analysts are doing, good, bad, or indifferent. For what it's worth, and agreeing with JP, I think there has been systematic institutional buying taking place, since many shares are being sold right near the end of the day on block trades. Upticks created by block trades at the end of the day are highly indicative of big boys moving around change in their pockets. Regards, JB Robert, I will look at that article you mentioned, thank you. I had not heard of the author before, but then again I don't read Forbes, so that probably explains it. Thank you again, JB