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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (74075)	2/19/1999 2:09:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

Tenchusatsu, about this guy Danny Lam, It's a little known fact that before Wall Street's big-name stock analysts make recommendations, they often check in with their own behind-the-scenes industry gurus. For semiconductor industry analysts, that often means talking to Danny Lam. Very little known fact. Anybody ever heard of this guy? And, if the above is true, and he's negative on Intel, how come the predominant call on Intel right now is Strong Buy? That article is out to lunch. Next. Tony

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (74075)	2/19/1999 2:59:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Tenchusatsu,>>>Didn't I say before that this Danny Lam guy is a "virtual Kurlak"?<<< This guy is not so bad. In fact he is pretty good - probably very good. He knows his business and he is not out there hyping or playing master of the universe. What he says makes sense. >>>But in aggregate, I see unit PC growth as not having any prospect of going to the 30% level that would justify Intel as an above-average performer. So, in a nutshell, I don't think Intel offers great growth potential. <<< I couldn't agree more - Intel needs to produce a 30% growth rate to see the stock rocket. There is no need for us to lower the bar on this - and this is where I think Mr. Lam is wrong. Intel will deliver 30% earnings growth - I think Craig Barrett is pretty comfortable with that. For the next year and maybe for the year after. Where he is not comfortable is to deliver 30% top line growth. He has as much as said this when he took over and that is what his main focus will be. And, I feel pretty comfortable with Barrett delivering on 30% top line growth if for no other reason than that I don't think Craig Barrett would have mentioned this if he wasn't already fairly certain he was going to deliver on it. But, it is one thing to have blind faith in the guy, and something else to have faith in the guy but with some real good solid reasoning to back it up. Let me try. 1. Barrett is probably pretty far along with some telecom related acquisition (to capture those 2 Billion eyeballs) situation that will bring in top line revenue growth after the year 2000. 2. According to Lam when speaking of the US market:>>>I could not have envisioned PCs hitting 50% of homes if it wasn't for the Internet. I could see 25%. But not 50%. <<< I don't know it has hit 50 % - but the guy was wrong about 50% and he could be wrong about 75%. 3. Traditionally, North American PC sales accounts for 35-40% of worldwide sales. But the recent growth has been mostley in North America that was fueled by the growth in the Internet. Lam wrote off Europe and does not mention Asia at all for home penetration. He cites social problems in Europe for the inability of the PC to penetrate there: >>>It was very clear that the issue of PC adoption rates in Europe being much slower than North America is a structural problem. It's not an easy problem to solve. It involves dealing with things ranging from reasonably priced Internet access to social issues.<<< If the Internet is such a compelling force for future economic growth, both Europe and Asia will have to do what they have to do to catch up with the US. In Asia, it may mean that they never consider owning a western style home or going on western style vacations - but PC penetration will reach the level of PC penetration into US homes. Guaranteed. The same goes for Europe. They are not going to be left behind. They will make the necessary adjustments - maybe not as severe as the adjustments they have to make in Asia - but they will make the adjustments. 4. He doesn't mention anything about the impact of Xeon and the potential impact of IA64. He is a semi guy. He doesn't know the workstation, server , and information technology markets. In fact very few, if any of the analysts, know this market. This is a brand new market even for Intel. I'm sure they have a lot of market research to back up there entry into this market - but they are not hyping it. They are going to let the numbers speak for itself - I suspect quite loudly. Finally, it all depends on how you define "great growth". For me 25% appreciation YOY on my invest is quite acceptable. More would be better, of course. Regards, Mary