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 : Xilinx (XLNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: uu who wrote (2103)	12/6/1998 11:00:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3291

>>Reality is, XlNX has had nothing to show for a PE of 30 or more for a year and a half.<< they sure haven't shown eps growth. still haven't. statement was and is still true. from mike's post... >>B, Hallelujah, another tax miracle. Revenues and eps up, but taxes down. <G> Receivables were up, bigtime, indicating last week shipments to save the quarter. Ditto for inventories. Looks like oversupply with the customers well stuffed. Stockholders equity hit the skids. Pretty much what I expected. A 5% up eps caused solely by buying back shares, shipping aggressively, and holding inventory rather than facing price reality in this report. But, even taking the 5% eps at face value, why buy a risky stock like this when you can get a similar return from Treasuries? Selling at nearly 30 times eps, this is a bloated bugger.<< everything mike said was and is true. the only point of argument (b/c everything else is factual) is valuation. you think a no growth stock deserves a 45-50 pe. mike doesn't. i don't. history doesn't. now, if the returns of a treasury were better than xlnx when it was $39 then it is even more so now. how long will the bulls take 1 bird in the bush in lieu of 2 birds in their hand? it has already been a long, long time. it may be longer. i don't short precisely b/c i know with what i'm dealing with. if i forget then you post to me and remind me ;-)