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: Neal davidson who wrote (76395)	3/16/1999 12:40:00 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Neal - RE: "A rather negative article from thestreet.com. I wonder if Cramer shorts a stock right before he publishes crap like this." Why don't you ask Marcy Burstiner, the writer of that article? Someone posted an article by Cramer on this thread today. He said he was buying Intel.

To: Neal davidson who wrote (76395)	3/16/1999 1:40:00 AM
From: Gerald Walls	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Thread: A rather negative article from thestreet.com. I wonder if Cramer shorts a stock right before he publishes crap like this. TECH STOCKS >> SEMICONDUCTORS For Intel's Fast P3 Chip, Customer Appeal Spreads Slowly By Marcy Burstiner Staff Reporter 03/15/99 09:00 PM ET B-U-R-S-T-I-N-E-R. Huh. Funny way to spell "Cramer". Cramer has stated many times that he has no editorial control except over his own column. If you believe he's lying and fraudulently manipulating stock prices through TheStreet.Com then file a complaint with the SEC.

To: Neal davidson who wrote (76395)	3/16/1999 7:22:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy	Respond to of 186894

Neal, Actually, you want a negative article like that when you are buying. I believe Cramer said he is buying INTC...hmmmm. Perhaps he will have one of his stooges write an "Intel is the greatest" article right before he decides to sell his INTC position. Buy on bad news/press sell on good news/press.....that's how the traders play it. It's just happens to be very convenient that a guy like Cramer has an engine like thestreet.com to facilitate in creating buying and selling opportunities. FF

To: Neal davidson who wrote (76395)	3/16/1999 10:02:00 AM
From: Diamond Jim	Respond to of 186894

Cramer to be on CNBC tomorrow morning.

To: Neal davidson who wrote (76395)	3/16/1999 12:54:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Neal - Re: Drew Peck & "S.G. Cowen analyst Drew Peck is waiting instead for the Xeon processor for servers that Intel will launch this week. And that's a new product we know nothing about," Peck said. Cowen is not an underwriter of Intel. " This BOZO doesn't learn very fast. He said almost the EXACT SAME thing three months ago: "Peck maintains that "I'm not going to put a buy rating on a stock without knowing how it will do in 1999." If Intel does see spectacular revenue growth, it will come from its Xeon chip for the high-end server market. "Without Xeon this company would be a basket case," Peck says. "They are charging $1,000 apiece for it. But it's a brand-new product serving a brand-new market about which we know nothing." " Seems like the "Pecker" hasn't learned anything since last December ! Note: The article you posted today and the old article from last December are BOTH WRITTEN BY Marcy Burstiner . It seems she has her agenda all lined up - Always a Negative Spin on Intel. Paul {===================================} Silicon Valley Dec 28, 1998 Silicon Valley: The Last Remaining Intel Bears Dig In By Marcy Burstiner Staff Reporter SAN FRANCISCO -- And then there were three. Thomas Kurlak, the Merrill Lynch analyst and mightiest of Intel (Nasdaq:INTC - news) bears, capitulated yesterday by upping his 1999 estimate on the chip bellwether to $4.25 a share from $3.60 and raised his price target to 144. Intel stood at 119 before Kurlak's move. The stock was trading up 3/4 today at 125 3/4. Kurlak was knocked down by gale-force winds that have buffeted Intel's stock up 60% since Oct. 8. But while endangered, the species known as the Intel bear isn't extinct yet. A few still sit huddling for protection in a world increasingly hostile to them and their views. Neither SG Cowen's Drew Peck nor Needham & Co.'s Tad LaFountain are wavering. Peck's rating on Intel is a hold, and LaFountain's is neutral. William Milton at Brown Brothers Harriman also has a neutral rating on the stock, but we couldn't get him on the phone to gauge the strength of his conviction. None of these firms, nor Merrill Lynch, is an underwriter for Intel. Peck and LaFountain remain unbowed after the upgrade by the high-profile Kurlak. "I'm mystified how people can so blindly go and recommend [Intel]," Peck says. He and LaFountain maintain that too many others are ignoring Intel's fundamentals. "I always heard you were supposed to buy low and sell high," says LaFountain. "My mistake was that I should have had a more favorable rating on Intel when it was trading at a lower price." The problem isn't so much Intel's business, which LaFountain calls "one of the greatest companies ever put together." The problem is future growth. To justify its current stock price, LaFountain says, Intel will need revenues to double from $30 billion next year to $60 billion in 2002, something he believes is impossible even given the company's cost-costing moves. Peck maintains that "I'm not going to put a buy rating on a stock without knowing how it will do in 1999." If Intel does see spectacular revenue growth, it will come from its Xeon chip for the high-end server market. "Without Xeon this company would be a basket case," Peck says. "They are charging $1,000 apiece for it. But it's a brand-new product serving a brand-new market about which we know nothing." Neither Peck nor LaFountain set price targets on stocks. An analyst makes a fool of himself if he raises his own price target once that price target has been reached, LaFountain says. If the analyst has done his job right, he should urge investors to sell once the target is reached: Unless the company has announced spectacular news, the fundamentals should no longer support the higher price. To LaFountain, this is like saying, "It has reached our objective. Oh, just kidding!" "I call it the American Bandstand ratings system -- it has a good beat, I can dance to it, so I give it an 85," LaFountain says. While he wasn't naming names, it's hard to listen to LaFountain and not think of the current Intel ax, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter analyst Mark Edelstone, who upped his target price from 110 to 120 on Nov. 10, then bumped it up again to 150 six weeks later. Like Kurlak, LaFountain has taken his shares of blows in the press. In its Dec. 21 issue, Fortune ran an article titled "Getting Intel Wrong" that called him a "small-fry analyst" who has held onto his hold rating since June. Intel's shares have nearly doubled since June. "I enjoyed that," LaFountain says, adding that he may indeed change his rating on Intel. "But my next move would be a sell, not a buy," he says. Of the herd that has issued Intel upgrades to buys and strong buys even as the stock topped 110, Peck only says, "Those who are making the call are in a fantasy land." © 1998 TheStreet.com, All Rights Reserved. See TheStreet.com's full site for more of its unique insider's perspective on Wall Street. Try a 30-day subscription for free! Archives: [ Thu Dec 24 \| Wed Dec 23 \| Tue Dec 22 \| Mon Dec 21 \| Fri Dec 18 \| more ]