Seeking Alpha

Cincinnatus

Cincinnatus
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Cincinnatus' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Intel Has Been, And Still Is, A Lousy Stock For Investors [View article]
    Told you that many times Rudester, including just above. How about you pretend to pay attention?
    Sep 6 01:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel Has Been, And Still Is, A Lousy Stock For Investors [View article]
    progress, I understand tech is difficult to figure out for the average investor, which is why this article is a disservice. It trivializes the issue into one of looking at past stock price performance and extrapolating that into the future.

    If you're referring to SA articles in the last 9 months most of those amazing things are yet to be realized. Haswell is still ramping. Bay Trail will likely be officially released next week and products rolling out in the next month or two. Avoton (the microserver cpu) was just announced yesterday. Merrifield which is the smartphone cpu will be out early next year. Anyone considering INTC should be doing so based on one's best guess as to what impact those products that are literally just falling out of the product pipeline will have in the next 12 to 24 months.

    It's ok to say sorry, too difficult for me to feel comfortable predicting the impact of these products (and one needs to overlay this with the macro environment) I'm out of here. But this article doesn't try to do anything constructive.
    Sep 5 01:23 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel Has Been, And Still Is, A Lousy Stock For Investors [View article]
    progress, there's nothing meaningful in this article. Pull up a chart of some of the tech stocks (MSFT, CSCO, QCOM) and you'll see charts that look the same. And if you really want a flavor of the tech bubble look up Nortel, Tellabs, and Lucent (NRTLQ, TLAB, and good luck on the last one) charts. The tech bubble was about wild expectations and P/E ratios to match. The tech industry since then has been recovering from P/E contraction. It's not just insufficient, it's misleading to equate the stock price of these companies since the tech bubble with company fundamentals.

    If you want to invest for the long term (and that's longer than 3 quarters) then you need to look at the fundamentals (or "techno-geek babble" in the author's terminology).
    Sep 5 11:56 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel Has Been, And Still Is, A Lousy Stock For Investors [View article]
    "This Is The Only Chart An Investor Needs To See"

    No, the chart an investor needs to see is the P/E ratio historical chart, because it would explain that stock price chart. It's also fact that the relation between P/E ratio history and stock price charts is common to much of the tech industry when you're comparing against the 2000 tech bubble highs. The fact that you aren't aware of or fail to understand the role historical P/E ratio plays in the tech universe invalidates what little you have in the way of a fundamental argument here.

    I'd ask if you're expecting P/E ratio contraction to continue indefinitely, but it'd be rhetorical because it's not a question that you bothered to ask yourself, yet it's central to the issue of assigning a price to not only INTC, but to any stock.
    Sep 5 02:05 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Intel's Profits Could Skyrocket [View article]
    "Tough to charge much when your customers are beating themselves to death on price. And, ARM vendors are not standing still."

    AMD beat itself to death on price. You're trying to turn a negative into a positive. Intel's advantage is they have the cost structure to compete and win on price, as they've done many times before in various market segments.
    Sep 4 01:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel - Done In By Moore's Law [View article]
    Saterly, Intel is ahead and widening their lead. Recognizing that doesn't even require you to understand why they're better. When Intel bought Infineon's wireless business Infineon was already using TSMC. The conversion to Intel fabs is a matter of product timing and economics, not competency or capabilities.
    Sep 4 01:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel - Done In By Moore's Law [View article]
    Robert,
    Moore's Law does help if you understand computing, which you've made clear you don't by your numerous submissions. Who dominates the HPC space? What do you think enables such efforts as bringing the network/mesh fabric components on die? And even ignoring network bandwidth/latency improvements driven by Moore's Law, you still benefit in bringing the cost of cores down through increased core counts and parallelization.

    "Not my field."

    Indeed, so stop pretending it is.
    Sep 4 11:56 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel - Done In By Moore's Law [View article]
    Samstown,
    Here's what Otellini did. We're nearing the endgame. By 10nm, if not 14nm, it will be clear to this author what Moore's Law is and who has best exploited it, as they have for decades. This author has no clue at present.
    http://bit.ly/Yb7hgC
    Sep 4 11:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel - Done In By Moore's Law [View article]
    So in other words, Intel, which has done more than any company over the last 40+ years to bring inexpensive compute power to the masses, is going to be done in by a shift to bringing inexpensive compute power to the masses?

    And if this umpteenth call for the end of Moore's Law comes to fruition, where then are Qualcomm and the ARM camp? They're already behind Intel and falling further behind. What miracle does the author see occurring here that Qualcomm and the ARM camp are no longer subject to Moore's Law?
    Sep 4 11:32 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Intel's Profits Could Skyrocket [View article]
    Everyone will sell INTC and invest in oil&gas MLPs, because that's what they thought they were buying in the first place.
    Sep 3 11:26 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel: Where's Haswell? [View article]
    Hal,
    You have no point. If you believe you're a successful market timer then you'd have bought INTC late last year below $20 and sold in June above $25. You'd now be looking for a reentry point.

    For most the delusion of believing in market timing isn't a prudent strategy.
    Sep 3 11:19 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Intel Makes Significant LTE Progress [View article]
    Thomas,
    Nothing in your reply proves your point that Lenovo has "switched" to Qualcomm. Unreadable blog posts where you quote yourself don't count. Lenovo will have a future smartphone utilizing Intel parts, you can bank on that. Using your "logic" Lenovo would have never released the K900 because they "switched" away from using Intel when they released the K860 with a Samsung part.

    The problem is your "logic" isn't logical.
    Aug 31 03:43 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Avoid Intel, Buy Qualcomm Instead? - Part 1 [View article]
    "Why Levono doesn't use 7160 on K910 give the fact it has been released now?"

    Thomas,
    I already addressed that here:
    http://seekingalpha.co...

    You're obviously not familiar with this industry. The fact that Lenovo released the K900 doesn't mean Lenovo is locked into using Intel for every future product, any more than by releasing models with Qualcomm parts means they're now locked into using only Qualcomm. That's patently silly. If HP releases a notebook with an AMD processor does that mean HP has switched to using all AMD processors on each future HP product? It's no different in the smartphone space.
    Aug 31 03:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Avoid Intel, Buy Qualcomm Instead? - Part 1 [View article]
    "For the digital radio, what Intel show is a atom with wifi transceiver."

    Yes Thomas, and the slides clearly state that. That you know nothing of this topic is clear when you claimed this is nothing new. QCOM doesn't do this and has shown nothing that indicates they are working on it.

    And this is not limited to WiFi. Rosepoint was a demonstration vehicle implementing a WiFi transceiver, but Intel has already stated they are working on 4G LTE.

    This will put Qualcomm at a huge disadvantage when it appears.
    http://bit.ly/16wWOkM
    http://seekingalpha.co...
    Aug 31 03:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Avoid Intel, Buy Qualcomm Instead? - Part 1 [View article]
    Thomas, I own QCOM. Do you own any INTC? I don't have the blinders on that you do.

    Saterley has no idea what he's talking about. Digital RF transceivers are a breakthrough technology. See the link.
    Aug 30 01:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
3,355 Comments
4,479 Likes