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: Skeeter Bug who wrote (26960)	12/6/1998 10:40:00 PM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 70976

Skeeter, re >the amount of notes i get saying "the stock went up so you were wrong" is immense.< I'm not telling you anything you don't know when I say it happens often that one can be correct on fundamentals, but wrong in forecasting the direction of price. If we could keep that in mind and separate, we'd have fewer arguments. Gottfried

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (26960)	12/6/1998 11:06:00 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

<<i would not be the least bit surprised if both amat and xlnx were in nearly the same state they currently find themselves after another 12 months.>> I don't know anything about XLNX. I definitely would be surprised if AMAT were not better off a year from now. But not too surprised. Nothing in this sector surprises me too much! <G> <<the amount of notes i get saying "the stock went up so you were wrong" is immense.>> But the point is to buy low and sell high, isn't it? I'm a great believer in fundamentals as a long-term tool, but the predictable responses of investors to improvements in leading indicators must also be taken into account. <<also, when EVERYTHING is going up it probably isn't indicative of some super individual company effort.>> The large cap semiconductor equips have far outperformed the market since October 8th. <<it is probably due to pure supply and demand of paper shares. this demand may or may not be due to improved business conditions. it could just be rank speculation.>> And when you take your profits to the bank, do you think they're going to care one whit whether you got them by analyzing the underlying business of companies, or by understanding the psychology of investors? Do you think they're going to refuse your deposits because they didn't result from "some super individual company effort? <<why is nvls up 175% from recent lows and amat is up less than 100%?>> Because AMAT, as the largest-cap stock in the sector, benefited from investors' recent preference for large-cap stocks to such a degree that it never did get to the fire-sale valuations of the other stocks in the sector. And, to bolster the case by throwing in a little of your cherished underlying business analysis, because NVLS, unlike AMAT, is still making a profit. Any other questions? <g> <<that is why i now own puts on nvls. jun 40 puts, to be exact.>> It won't surprise me if you make money on those, since NVLS has been one of the most volatile stocks in an extremely volatile sector. But my crystal ball is just not that good, so if you don't mind, I'll just stay long until bookings are making new all-time highs, and then I will take some or all off the table. <<a lot can happen in 6 months.>> Now that I can agree with!