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: uu who wrote (26931)	12/6/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 70976

Addi, Thanks for exposing Skeet for what he really is. Hopefully few people will now rally around his ludicrous opinions as they've done in the past. BTW, whatever happened to all of the people who were calling for AMAT at $12???? I was painted as a lunatic for suggesting AMAT has a higher value than this and many people took turns taking shots at me. Teri S. where are you? I guess you'll have to sink your $$ into Treasuries for the coming 5 years. Or are these too risky for you? A message for all threaders: When someone claims the sky is falling and there is no hope, back up the truck and load up. Equities, particularly the big tech names such as MSFT, INTC, CSCO and AMAT thoroughly outperform the averages over time and it pays to buy on significant pullbacks, although this will run counter to what "they" will have you believe. Listen to them at your own risk. Brian

To: uu who wrote (26931)	12/6/1998 5:58:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

(slightly off topic again) addi, you are confused. kind of like those guys that that ran up tmso thinking it was ticket master online. i'm talking business. you are talking stock price. apples and oranges. i'm wrong on business? prove it. you can't. i'd like to see you try, though. why am i going to buy puts? b/c the herd doesn't understand the business and its current and future challenges. the stock price, over time, will reflect fair value more accurately. $61 ain't fair value. hey, it could go to $70. maybe $80. i bought cmb puts at 468 before it went to $77. a few months later i was sitting on 1000%+ returns. the business hasn't changed significantly from a no eps growth company. please don't be so utterly stupid as to quote seasonal growth as though it will continue into jan-march. a specific intel bull avidly does that and, in fact, lots of intel bulls are currently impressed with seasonally caused spikes. it is as stupid as saying that a decline in eps for the jan-march q will continue going forward. but, this is a rational concept so you might not get it ;-) btw, i do consider mike burke an online buddy and i do give credit when others do the analysis. remember, the stock and the business are not the same. repeat until you understand. if you grow old repeating that over and over then, oh well... ;-) the higher xlnx goes the higher the probability that i mint money in 1999. although people like you who get confused a lot are slightly irritating, i do appreciate you as stocks wouldn't double for very little reason w/o the likes of you. now, are you smart enough to sell? ;-)