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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DellFan who wrote (88095)	1/7/1999 2:28:00 PM
From: Fangorn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

DellFan, >Re: What a whisper number is - an authoritative definition< What authority gave this definition? Reading this definition only confirms my opinion that ALL whisper numbers are a crock.

To: DellFan who wrote (88095)	1/8/1999 3:14:00 AM
From: On the QT	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 176387

Hi DellFan and Thread, Thank you for giving us some first hand insight as to how your company arrives at the "whisper number". I found that approach logical. In fact the posts of some of our fellow "threadsters" also presented points that also had good logic to it. Unfortunately, there really, to my knowledge, is no one accepted to all "whisper number". If that assumption is true than we have more than one "whisper number" that needs to be evaluated. Mindful of the problem, whatever that " whisper number" is, measuring it for it consensus value is somewhat difficult. We don't have a list of known and accepted "whisper numbers" being submitted for consolidation into one composite " whisper number". We have a known and identifiable list of analysts submitting their earnings estimates. It is relatively easy to come up a logical way to evaluate their estimates. That is not the case with the "whisper number". Yet in many cases it is the missed "whisper number" that is pointed to when a company meets the "earnings estimate" and still performs less than expected in the stock price. To me, right now, it is the "whisper number" however derived, that, receives the most pre-earning announcement publicity, that becomes the "earnings number plus" that the company probably needs to shoot for if it wants to continue to appreciate short term. Problem with that is, in many cases, that whisper number is not as clear as I would hope. Like it or not we have to deal with that "whisper number" whatever it is. It has become a fact of life in that there is little question that hitting that "whisper number" has become more important. The publicity attached to it (read increased media attention) and past experience showing that more often than not, many stocks, not hitting the "whisper number" has negatively impacted the stocks short term price. Those of us that are trading, as opposed to investing, are more sensitive to this rather vexing problem. Nevertheless, it does negatively affect us all that are long in the stock. It is also is a problem for the company. Now not only do they have to deal with hitting the earnings number they most likely have to hit the "whisper number". If they don't, well, we have seen what happened to our last Dell quarter. I think the most disturbing element I recently read regarding this was to be found in John Rosser's thoughts on this subject. Here is what John Rosser said to Dellfan: " Without going into all the details, it is clear that whisper numbers are subject to manipulation by those who have something to gain by a company missing/beating the consensus analyst number." If we believe the missed "Whisper Number" can affect the short term pricing of a stock, then what would stop "those" to create a missed "Whisper Number". Could they do it more than once? If this were so, then what would stop "those" from doing it for two quarters in a row? If they could do that, could they do it each quarter? What if what John had said were true and whisper numbers were subject to manipulation by "those" who could cause a company to beat the consensus analyst number? What then? (I know a pleasant problem for most of us on this thread but hopefully a moral dilemma!) What happens to our system of stock selection? Do we now add this to the new handicapping the "powers that be" skills to be learned to cope with the new paradigm? Sincere Regards, QT I see potential here. Bring on the Market Makers!:)