Drew Peck Quotations

Meanwhile, that's been in the midst of reasonably stable pricing in the processor business and I think that the stable pricing is about to come to an end. By the end of this year, we're going to see sharply eroding prices as we get into the first half of next year.

Obviously, this company is having big problems. It's cash flow negative. They are now at the point where they are selling off pieces of their business to subsidize the remaining piece. All their eggs are in one basket.

But that's probably too academic a point of view. The reality is that investors, especially short-term investors and day traders, all gravitate to the most beaten-up names because that's where they get the highest bounce.

But both of those benefits are going to disappear by December and then January and February are going to be very, very tough. I don't have an issue for Intel's third quarter, which is mostly over. My concerns are mostly focused on the first quarter of next year -- that's when things are going to start getting derailed.

I don't think were anywhere close to the bottom.

I think a lot of people were a bit nervous about this quarter and there might be a bit of a collective sigh of relief that they pulled it out and that should be viewed positively. The second half of the year is likely to be a whole lot better.

Optical networking is exploding, and the market will experience tremendous growth during the next decade. As we noted with Digital Subscriber Lines, few important technologies experience smooth and steady adoption cycles. Customers cannot accurately calculate the exact rate of adoption, and the inevitable result is inventory imbalances.

The assumption is that a lot of the problems that we're seeing in the semiconductor industry now are related to the economy, and any move by Greenspan to shore up the economic situation we're seeing is going to be very beneficial.

While the company has seen no negative trend in its bookings activity, the Nortel remarks suggest a downturn is inevitable, although probably not until the first quarter of 2001. Unfortunately, stocks selling at more than 100 times multiples don't fare well in the face of any negative trend.

When it rains, it always seems to pour at AMD.

The PC business looks like it's going to be struggling for most of next year. If you look a little bit outside the PC world and look at some of the things that are going on in the consumer and industrial sectors, looks to me like there is going to be a nice rebound coming.

We saw a sharp drop in demand for processors. If that sustains, then it's likely we'll see some disappointments in the PC sector and related component companies.

There's no more upside coming. So we're not going to see more than 65, maybe 70 cents out of this company for the whole year. This is a very expensive stock to be earning 65 or 70 cents.

A lot is going to hinge on how much credibility there is in the comments ... that the microprocessor business has stabilized.

They had an upside surprise in gross margins, but their guidance for 2002 is basically flat from here.

The numbers themselves tell a pretty grim story, so if you're going to hang your hat on this, you have to believe the qualitative commentary rather than the quantitative information.

It's not a disaster. But it's just not good enough to rally the stock.

I'm not only in agreement, I've been feeling for quite a while that these issues are going to emerge pretty soon. I guess the only question I have is, if everything that Kumar described is true, which frankly, I believe it is, then why does he still have a 'buy' on the stock?

In light of the huge upside we saw last quarter, I think a lot of investors might have been expecting a little bit better. That may be a nagging problem when you consider that the stock was discounting fairly high expectations already. I suspect there could be some weakness as a result of that.

In an absolute sense, the results were good. But I think there may be some disappointment over revenue, which came in basically in line with expectations.

Intel's pre-announcement goes a long way to explaining softness in the DRAM market. PCs consume well over one-half of all DRAMs.

Integrating graphics with the processor compromises performance of the graphics. The problem isn't that people aren't interested in the low-end PCs selling at $600, it's that people aren't interested in processors whose performance is compromised because the graphics is built in.

If the K-7 doesn't sell, they have to get out of the processor business. They've really bet the company on the K-7.

But ironically, this is going to turn the shortage into a surplus in a very short period of time. This problem has also been masked by seasonal demand for processors, which is very strong at this time of the year.

For the last three quarters, the whole industry has been on fire. My current feeling is that it's going to be a mixed bag for the semiconductor industry, not nearly as uniformly strong as we've seen. That is the beginning of a general deceleration in the industry, but that deceleration is going to be very sector specific.