SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Mo Chips who wrote (68424)11/11/1998 9:21:00 PM
From: MR. PANAMA (I am a PLAYER)  Respond to of 186894
 
Once again...WHO is Kurlick....INTC HATH CLEARLY SPOKEN...



To: Mo Chips who wrote (68424)11/12/1998 12:57:00 AM
From: nihil  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
RE: Kurlak as an analyst

Say what you will about Kurlak (and I've had my cheap shots at him), but he is the only analyst who makes available his computable models (something Intel itself has been unwilling to share with us even in retrospect). If you disagree with his assumptions, you can make your own. If you disagree with his conclusions, you can dig back into them and find out where he went wrong. His bad misses on Q3 and probably Q4 result from something, but what? In his July 15 forecast he projected sales of $5,950 million for Q3 and in Sept 15 $6,460 million. Where did that $510 million come from? He forecasts unit mpu sales of 21 million as of the summer, and estimates 22.8 million as of the fall. He missed Celeron's 2.8 million altogether, and this looks like one major source of his shortfall. The other, I guess, is his estimated price of $550 for Pro/Xeon, and, in the future, the forecast of $450 for 1999. Sounds awfully cheap to me.
Instead of barking at this guy, I think it would make sense to download his model from askmerrill.com (you'll have to register but it is free) and see if we cannot collectively build a more reliable model for forecasting Intel's future revenues and profits.