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: Black-Scholes who wrote (80592)	5/7/1999 6:16:00 PM
From: rich evans	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Intel has the strong-arm chip which is an entry in this catagory I believe. Also with all the fabless chip companies out there and the recent articles about a lack of capacity occuring in the finished wafer foundaries, why can't Intel get into this business as another business if processors slow down or is it two lowclass/low margin? Anyone? Rich.

To: Black-Scholes who wrote (80592)	5/7/1999 8:33:00 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Black-Scholes, Re: "Gentlemen, don't you think it is a no-brainer and probably imperative that INTC buyout BRCM and CUBE?...What is INTC's strategy for the set top box market" Well, since I'm not a genleman, I won't comment. ;) Amy J

To: Black-Scholes who wrote (80592)	5/7/1999 9:45:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Respond to of 186894

Black-Scholes - INTC acquisitions. I believe one of the Intel Exec's was recently quoted in the press to the effect that the pace of INTC acquisitions may well pick up. I don't want to comment on possible candidates. I'll leave that to the rest of the thread. PB

To: Black-Scholes who wrote (80592)	5/8/1999 8:36:00 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Black-Scholes:>>>don't you think it is a no-brainer and probably imperative that INTC buyout BRCM and CUBE? And don't say INTC will just develop those chips on their own. That's the typical arrogance that always precedes a fall. <<< Do you mean Intel should pay ~$1/1.5B to buy CUBE's audio and video compression technology? How long do you think it would take for a team of 4 at IA labs to duplicate this technology? My guess is that if they couldn't do it in less than 6 mos., they should be fired. As to paying $10 to $15B for BRCM, that is just too ridiculous to contmeplate. As for the set top box market, how big is that market anyway? Suppose the market is 500 million set top boxes - sure that would be a great business for BRCM to get into. But for Intel, a $10B market over 5 to 10 years is... how do you spell... chump change? Let's give Craig Barrett the benefit of the doubt and let him work out his strategy in his own way and using his own timetable. The good news for Intel shareholders is that we have plenty of cushion before we need to take desperate measures - such as inflating earnings through accounting trickery and making grand PR type acquisitions. But, Craig Battett does have to do a better job communicating with the investment public. We are not all rocket scientists. Lot of us don't really understand what Intel does for a living - including professional analysts covering the company. Most of us work with and own PC's - and that we understand. But, that is about all Barrett can safely assume that we understand. We don't understand the Information Technology (IT) market and Intel's future in that market. Alan Green tried to explain to us the past week what the impact of Information Technology has been to the US and world economy. Even he admitted he had difficulty understanding its full impact. He kind of said that the impact of IT has not been picked up by economic data and implied that it may be the underlying cause for market exhuberance and in his very understated manner hinted and cautioned about a new paradigm. Remember, AG was a Fortran and Cobol programmer at one time - and may have a better understanding of IT than most. Secondly, Barrett should more fully explain to the rest of us, what the "server farms" are. Very few people understand what this business is all about - including virtually all of the the professional analysts covering the company. Share prices should improve considerably if Barrett could just explain to non rocket scientists what the current business is and how it is situated vis a vis the e-commerce business of the future. He can then go about expanding that part of the business without constantly being second guessed by people who have never managed a $1 million budget much less than a $30B one. Right now, virtually any market manipulator can cry out competiton, falling ASP, inventory build up, weak retail demand, appliances and Intel stock plummets. Mary