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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gottfried who wrote (25721)	10/24/1998 5:45:00 PM
From: stockycd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

G, With Friday's price action, the third point in a upper downtrend line was established for AMAT. Draw a line to connect the tops from mid-May to early August to yesterday. Next week will be key. If this trendline is broken, I'll then be waiting for a double top at ~37. CD FWIW: I'm long AMAT.

To: Gottfried who wrote (25721)	10/24/1998 8:08:00 PM
From: Paul V.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Gottfried,Based on that analysis AMAT isn't worth $34 right now. I totally agree. But in looking back in 1996 AMAt prices were not worth the EPS. You published a chart earlier in which you showed the comparison of AMAT price to EPS, I believe for 1996. I recall that there was an opposite relationship between the two. You may want to repost that chart of price as compared to EPS during that approximate time period. I do pay a tremendous amount of attention to AMAT fundamental analysis. It is the first thing I do before investing. However, with such a violatile stock like the SEMI's I buy the Gorillas, lookk at past performance, then let the supply and demand movements as calculated on the DW Market, Sector, RS, and specific stock dictate my purchases. Additionally, I place emphasis on the downside risk vrs the upside gain along with tracking the IBD published data. So far it has worked for me as I have been able to average 25.5% cpmpounded growth since 1986. However, in investing past success is now indication to future gain, IMO. Just hope I am able to continue to continue this pattern. But, who knows. Just my opinions. Paul V>

To: Gottfried who wrote (25721)	10/25/1998 3:48:00 AM
From: Chuck Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

excerpt from the article: The cutbacks, however, should put DRAM makers in an advantageous position in late 1999 and early 2000, when demand outstrips supply for the first time in three years, Fuhs said. Dataquest predicts DRAM revenue will get back on a growth track next year, and hit more than $30 billion in 1999 and $52 billion in 2000. What's your take on this? I know RAM prices in the consumer market have recently doubled. It seems they're saying consumption will catch up with production capacity in the next few years... Your thoughts?

To: Gottfried who wrote (25721)	10/25/1998 11:57:00 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

GM, I believe the disparity in views over what is a fair value for AMAT lies in changing industry conditions, or a perception thereof. Curently I am holding 3 articles from the past week entitled: -DRAM Shortage Predicted in 2000 -DRAM Market to see Recovery in 1999 -Chip Gear BTB Falls to 0.57 Current EPS estimates are being thrown out of the window by many who are accumulating at these levels. Why would someone pay $34 for a stock with a EPS of $0.50 for next year???? The anecdotal evidence points to an over-tightening of the belt which may be followed by a floodgate of capex, or so the theory goes. Historically, the deeper the BTB has fallen, the following move up was even more violent and prolonged. If these predictions are correct about a DRAM imbalance in 2000 and AMAT is able to earn say $3.00, is the stock overvalued here? I believe you already know what I think<GGG> BK