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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Earlie who wrote (57755)	4/28/1999 9:54:00 AM
From: valueminded	Respond to of 132070

Earlie: In ref to IBMs financial statments. Where did you get them for this quarter. All the news services I could pull up and the SEC filings did not show anything in the detail level that you and MB obtained. Additionally, if IBM is buying back shares and using debt to do so, obviously that debt comes at a cost. Shouldnt their EBITDA be decreasing as a result. ie 2billion dollar buy back retires 10mil shares. Interest payments on 2bill at 6% would be 120mil/year or roughly 12$ per retired share. This should be a net negative unless their before tax earnings are in excess of 12$/share. I understand this is rudimentary analysis as I do not include the "tax benefit" of lots of debt. Comments.... thanks

To: Earlie who wrote (57755)	4/28/1999 12:37:00 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Earlie, Is there any way for an investor with a day job to bet the coming crash of the internet stocks? What I'm really looking for is an Internet bear fund, I think, lessor profits but acceptable risk.

To: Earlie who wrote (57755)	4/28/1999 1:26:00 PM
From: J. P.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Hi Earlie, Don Hays mentions your NYT IBM comments his market commentary, although he does not mention you by name. wheatfirst.com <<IBM's earnings was clearly the catalyst to excite the markets, as their first quarter report showed revenue increases of 15 percent, and 42% in earnings--blowing away everyone's estimate. Of course, you know I couldn't let that good news go by without throwing a little cloud over them, so I am amazed that the market chose to add $30 billion of market cap to Big Blue as a result. Especially when I notice that the robust revenue gains were mostly in PC sales, where they have consistently lost money. We also note that the year over year comparison was against a horrible first quarter last year. One analyst cited in the New York Times, points out that IBM's average annual revenue growth in 1997 and 1998 was 3.7%, and that the annual growth in the operating profit declined from 5.8% to 0.7%. It was in this environment that the price of this big-cap stock has moved from 70 to yesterday's close of 209. That seems to be a big gain for rather mundane operating performance. It makes you wonder why, until you see that the company has been buying back stock at a frenetic pace. Their number of shares has decreased by 22% since 1995, using internally produced cash flow. But their cash flow was not sufficient to fund these massive stock buybacks, as they added over $7 billion of corporate debt. It looks to me as if the price increase is not so much a function of their performance, as their own buybacks--another sign of the times.>>

To: Earlie who wrote (57755)	4/29/1999 5:39:00 AM
From: accountclosed	Respond to of 132070

Private lawsuit shows Microsoft tactics - WSJ But the Utah case, scheduled to go to trial in January, is a glimpse of the problems Microsoft could face from private lawsuits, the newspaper said. If Microsoft is found to be a monopoly in the Justice Department's case in federal court here, private plaintiffs could find it easier to bring antitrust charges, the newspaper said. Caldera contends that the software giant planted a bug intentionally in an early version of Windows aimed at Caldera. The suit also accused Microsoft of illegally pressuring PC makers not to buy Caldera's operating system. biz.yahoo.com