Most hardcore gamers (referring to college students that spend over 40 hours a week playing mmorgs like everquest/world of warcraft) are moving away from intel. In addition to losing market share on personal computer, intel also losing market share on server market (Blizzard bought over 1500 servers using amd chips just a few weeks ago and I believe the upcoming high flier mmorg from Vanguard will also use servers using amd chips). (I do not own any share in intc or amd.)
Yeah, yeah, yeah... AMD did/is kicking Intel's behind but Intel still rules the roost. They needed a good whipping to cut the fat and get in gear with design. But that's also why I would think it may take a bit before INTC rallies again. So I think when the street really feels INTC is down for the count is when to buy for the long-term.
Anyone ever hear a car named Packard? Studebaker? How about some tech companies that are dust? Intel for all any of us know could be toast in no time. The past is in the history books, the future is what counts. Intel margins are slipping, once that starts to happen it is a sure sign that the glory days for a companies products are over. Anyone ever know about Peter Lynch, this area was one of his favorites, peter would say when a companies expansion and margins peaked, pull the cord and bail out while you still have some altitude. (paraphrased) AMD is a valid competitor now and also the personal pc mkt is now a commodity item which will receive life support from the replacement cycles. Chips will and meet new needs etc, i do not see any one provider dominating a complete area as the pc chip mkt was dominated by intel for so long in the past. Myself, and i do not trade stocks now, i see intel as a player not as a leader, amd is not going away, this last qtr their margins actually increased to like 58% something. The chip game is going to be wider than just pc chips. INTEL is not the only game in town anymore. Do not trade like General Custer fought the last battle. Ya do not want to get scalped from relying on past victories. Stocks look ahead not backwards........
Just keep in mind that INTC hit 20 twice in the last 3 days. INTC is not the only player in the PC market but PC market has also grown 100 fold in the last 5 years. INTC seems is not an obvious buy. It has stuck in the mud and everyone has a dozen reasons not to buy it but I expect it to hit 24 in the next two months. Maybe a good trade is to buy Call 20 for May. This way you limit the possible damage and you are still in for a possible run-up. Now Call 20 May is at 0.15-0.20
I decided to hold back. I'm still looking to commit a chunk when I feel that the stuck gets it's footing.
why don't you slowly buy into it as opposed to dumping a chunk. Say you have 3000 shares to invest... stagger it in 300 share chunks.
From Reuter's: Intel Corp. (INTC) shares have eased 3 percent since the chipmaker's lackluster outlook on April 19 for second quarter growth. Given analyst projections for profits growth, though, the shares still look too pricey, an analysis based on a capital asset pricing model shows - even for some growth investors. Continued below On average, analysts are expecting a long-term earnings growth rate of 12.5 percent for Intel. Given the volatility level in the shares, our analysis, based on the recent price-to-earnings ratio and volatility, indicates that a new position would require the company to achieve an annualized 13.8 percent per-share earnings growth rate for the next five years to reward the investment. From a purely mechanical standpoint the shares seem overvalued. But we've never been beholden to pure mechanics. The spread between the two figures is close enough that, in some other cases, we've called it fairly valued. We're more cautious in this case. When a stock looks overvalued relative to the mean estimate, it's worth asking what the spread is. If all of the analysts on Wall Street were in lockstep at the average, then a slight overvaluation isn't too much to be worried about. One could even argue that clarity of future earnings is worth a premium price. In this case, fifteen analysts give long-term growth projections. The most any of the analysts expects is long-term profits growth of 20 percent, the least is 4.6 percent. With the standard deviation of the projections at 3.9, none can really be called a statistical outlier. Intel management does offer guidance, at least for the next quarter, so the wide spread indicates significant analyst dissent regarding Intel's prospects, at least for the second half of 2006. If the experts are so widely torn, why should investors take a chance on a stock that is priced to reflect a better-than-average opinion?