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: Paul Engel who wrote (80567)	5/7/1999 12:47:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

<Intel reached $102 (non-split adjusted) BRIEFLY for A FEW HOURS in August 1997 - so WHY CHOOSE THAT DAMN PRICE as the basis for your asinine comparison?> You should know it better than anyone else. He's pulling a Scumbria. ;-) Now let's concentrate on characters whose negative opinions actually have an impact on this stock price, like Dan "Benny Blanco From The Bronx" Niles. Tenchusatsu P.S. - If you didn't understand the nickname, see the movie Carlito's Way.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (80567)	5/7/1999 12:48:00 PM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, RE:<<Why didn't you choose the LOWEST PRICE for Intel in 1997? Wouldn't fit your agenda - would it>> It also would be even more deceptive. Example--look at Compaq. Most on this board have been incessant about how poorly Compaq has performed. Yet under your analysis, Compaq has done much better than Intel. In the spring of '97, when Intel was setting its own lows, Compaq traded below $15, split adjusted. As of today, under your flawed analysis, CPQ would be up 70%, much better performance. Yet that is deceptive. Intel has performed much better than Compaq. And Compaq's sharp fall from its highs in indicative. Yet when Intel is compared to companies that have performed well but are in better sectors, its performance has lagged. Has nothing to do with my agenda--indeed, I really don't have an agenda here. If somebody here is pulling "cock-n-bull shit" numbers out their derriere, it is you.