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: Paul Engel who wrote (72855)2/4/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Doughboy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
It's worse than that, Paul. Kurlak raised 1999 estimates on Intel from 3.25 to 3.60 on January 14. And now three weeks later he's lowering them back down to 3.45. He also has completely reversed himself on his opinions. On Jan. 14, he said that price competition at the low end is not significant to Intel's bottom line because Intel has significantly cut costs and more important is the sales of high margin PIIs and Xeons. What kind of credibility does he have left with ML brokers? (BTW, I can't find the AMD downgrade on the ML website. Has anyone seen it?)

Doughboy.



To: Paul Engel who wrote (72855)2/4/1999 12:19:00 PM
From: Burt Masnick  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Been checking the AMD threads for anything like a reason for the no-show at the conferences. Nothing other than wild speculation so far. Are there mandated "quiet periods" for certain types of transactions, such as mergers, spin-offs or others that legally preclude a company making an announcement. If that's not it, what on earth is going on? My personal list of possibilities is:
1)Cancellation of order by major customer(s) (but that would leak)
2)Yield problems (K6 probably would leak, K7 wouldn't)
3)ASP diving like a submarine under attack (might leak)
4)Dresden problems (wouldn't leak)
5)Cash flow/financial problems (wouldn't leak)
6)Divestiture of malperforming parts of the business (might leak)

Burt



To: Paul Engel who wrote (72855)2/4/1999 12:26:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney  Respond to of 186894
 
Paul,>>>Kurlak has lost it.<<<

He is not going away. Notice how his call and reversal on AMD hasn't hurt him one bit. In fact, in all this market volatility, Kurlak's image will come out enhanced.

He will claim victory in that he "moved" the market and people will forget that he just made a disastrous call on AMD - causing people to lose a lot of money.

Mary