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: Fred Fahmy who wrote (79710)	4/22/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: L. Adam Latham	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Fred: Re: 1) Danny boy will eventually upgrade INTC. I'm not so sure. If he truly is aspiring to be another Kurlak, he just might reiterate his downgrade (though he certainly couldn't yell SELL any louder than he did last week). Hope you're right, however. INTC closed today higher than the day he downgraded, as well as the day he vented on CNBC. Adam

To: Fred Fahmy who wrote (79710)	4/23/1999 7:06:00 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Fred, RE:<<When he tells everyone to start buying again, INTC will be trading significantly higher then when he told everyone to sell. This is how these guys operate. Pathetic yes, but nothing new. The analysts are masters at telling everyone to sell low and buy high.>> Well, if his last "buy" call is any indication, that isn't true. He upgraded the stock to "strong buy" in April '98, with the stock trading a little under 80, pre-split. He downgraded the stock at a little more than 61, post-split. That's more than 50%, slightly better than 'pathetic.' Although this thread is a great source of information, the general take on analysts is comical. The average Wall St analyst isn't a contrary indicator, and neither is a positive indicator. They don't have any insider information, and cannot control where a stock trades. The effects of any upgrade or downgrade disappear in a matter of less than a day. There are a select few that are worth paying close attention to, and the others are nothing more than good sources of data. The venom directed at these guys and gals is rather funny. The only logic that I can figure behind this venom is that they are getting paid for what others on this thread are doing for fun. The only other conclusion I can draw is that you're looking for someone on whom you can blame poor investment decisions.