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: andy kelly who wrote (81802)	5/27/1999 3:27:00 PM
From: Saturn V	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Andy, Ref <I would like to revisit an issue from the Q1 CC that I haven't seen discussed here. The question of INTC's forward looking GM predictions. This is from memory but I think they predicted 59% +/- for Q1 and 2 but then down to 57% +/- for Q3 and 4. Why is this? Isn't this the opposite direction as one would expect, with back to school and Christmas buying pulling margins UP in Q3 and 4? Were they looking for Celeron sales to pull down margins, competition with the K7 to heat up, or the dreaded overcapacity price war to get started? All of the above? > This question was posed head-on to the Intel management. The reply was that they saw no good reason for the margin to decline, but wanted to hedge their numbers. We presume that such a warning gives Intel additional leeway to cut prices if needed., or cope with other unforseen eventualities in a fast paced and unpredictable environment. [ Intel management does not paint rosy and best case scenario's, but prefers to paint a very conservative picture .]

To: andy kelly who wrote (81802)	5/27/1999 4:14:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

andy - < I think they predicted 59% +/- for Q1 and 2 but then down to 57% +/- for Q3 and 4. > Actually, Intel predicted 57% +-2 for Q1 and Q2, but came in with 59% for Q1. I recall this to seemingly causing great consternation to our AMD threadmate and Needham Principle A.A. "Tad" La Fountain. Either he, or another analyst kept pressing C.O.O. Bryant to [paraphrasing] "just say 59 Andy", but Bryant kept saying "we predicted 57 +-2, and that's what we did [ because 59 is +2, therefor within the predicted range]. He did say they would revisit margin predictions after q2. PB