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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joseph Pareti who wrote (72985)	2/5/1999 11:15:00 AM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 186894

INTC: PRUDENTIAL SEC. decreased estimate for quarter ending 06/99 from $1.09 to $1.07 on 01/26/99 INTC: PRUDENTIAL SEC. decreased estimate for quarter ending 09/99 from $1.23 to $1.21 on 01/26/99 INTC: PRUDENTIAL SEC. decreased estimate for quarter ending 12/99 from $1.38 to $1.36 on 01/26/99 INTC: PRUDENTIAL SEC. has reiterated estimate for fiscal year ending 12/99 of $4.70 on 01/26/99 INTC: PRUDENTIAL SEC. increased estimate for quarter ending 03/99 from $1.00 to $1.06 on 01/26/99

To: Joseph Pareti who wrote (72985)	2/5/1999 11:23:00 AM
From: GVTucker	Respond to of 186894

<<how about march 1998 $75>> Kurlak did not change his rating in March '98. Your information is incorrect. <<june 1998 $68>> Kurlak did not change his short/intermediate term rating in June '98. He did change the long term rating. I have never paid attention to his long term rating, and not too many others have either. This strategy may have very well proven profitable in this one instance, but it has a lot more to do with Intel's valuation at that time rather than Kurlak's long term opinion of the stock. Historically, Kurlak's long term opinion of Intel has been pretty much irrelevant and uncorrelated to the stock's performance. EDIT: In fact, it is the rare Wall St analyst that DOES have any correlation with long term performance. There was an excellent study done last year that was published in Financial Analysts Journal on that very subject. Analysts on average aren't contrary indicators nor are they positive indicators. In almost every instance, an analyst's rating is best ignored. The interesting exception is when a company's underwriter downgrades the stock. In this one instance, that company's stock then underperforms the market in almost every instance. I guess the conclusion is that when an underwriter throws in the towel, there must be something severely wrong with the company.