Analysts confused by Intels projections [FUD]

[galego]

Unit growth projections for the company’s microprocessor sales the latter half of this year are unrealistic

Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/31768-analysts-confused-by-intel’s-projections

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...owth-projection-doesnt-add-up-says-bernstein/

 

[mrmt]

Unit growth projections for the company’s microprocessor sales the latter half of this year are unrealistic

Since when disagreeing with revenue projections of a company is the same of calling them FUD?

 

[AtenRa]

Its for the source, FudZilla

 

[frozentundra123456]

Its for the source, FudZilla

Maybe he is describing his own threads.

 

[Idontcare]

Unit growth projections for the company’s microprocessor sales the latter half of this year are unrealistic

Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/31768-analysts-confused-by-intel’s-projections

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...owth-projection-doesnt-add-up-says-bernstein/

You pluralized the thread title with the word "analysts" when the articles you linked clearly indicate this is the spreadsheet modeling of one single analyst.

Bernstein Research‘s Stacy Rasgon today reiterates

What is also clear in this one analyst's modeling is that she assumes desktop sales will continue to trend down, in other words she has to make an assumption that desktops will be even worse in Q4 as they are now so as to make a large artificially projected revenue shortfall to which Intel must then make up by selling even more non-desktop processors.

assuming current trends in personal computer sales

What we have here is a classic example of confirmation bias. You clearly want Intel to do badly, and any tidbit of information you can glean from the internet to support this desire is picked up by your eyes and immediately taken as "the truth!".

People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs.

What do you have here? A single analyst who has already gone out on a limb to rate Intel as "underperforming" in the past, and who is now trying to justify that rating by concocting hypothetical revenue shortfall models to save face.

You can find yourself a single analyst to support just about anything. I wouldn't be surprised if you could find at least one analyst out there who thinks the moon is made of cheese in their professional opinion.

What matters is what the majority thinks because there is a bit of safety in numbers from an averaging standpoint.

You want an intelligent assessment of Intel's revenue model, not a one-off solitary calculation done by an analyst who at best can be painted as "confused".

 

[sm625]

lol Intel is underperforming. They have both a 5 year and 10 year return of less than inflation factoring in dividends and taxes.

It is clearly not confirmation bias to assume a downward trend in PC sales will continue. The ASP on intel chips will and must come down because the vast majority of users can have all their computing needs met via a $20 ARM SoC. Meanwhile intel is charging $100-$600 plus another $30-$60 for a PCH. Its absurd to think that type of gouging will continue.

 

[Idontcare]

lol Intel is underperforming. They have both a 5 year and 10 year return of less than inflation factoring in dividends and taxes.

It is clearly not confirmation bias to assume a downward trend in PC sales will continue. The ASP on intel chips will and must come down because the vast majority of users can have all their computing needs met via a $20 ARM SoC. Meanwhile intel is charging $100-$600 plus another $30-$60 for a PCH. Its absurd to think that type of gouging will continue.

Inflation would be underperforming inflation if you factored in "dividends and taxes" into the calculation of inflation.

If we are just going to start arbitrarily concocting accounting scenarios to justify a future outlook that conforms to our prejudiced expectations then we may as well call it something neat and sexy. Like strawman, or something along those line.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Stacy Rasgon...he has an $18 price target on Intel shares and has been calling for further doom & gloom for quite a while. If you listened to him on the last conference call, he was very desperately trying to come up with any questions whose answers would paint Intel in a negative light...and he still failed.

I wonder when this guy finally capitulates

 

[Arachnotronic]

lol Intel is underperforming. They have both a 5 year and 10 year return of less than inflation factoring in dividends and taxes.

It is clearly not confirmation bias to assume a downward trend in PC sales will continue. The ASP on intel chips will and must come down because the vast majority of users can have all their computing needs met via a $20 ARM SoC. Meanwhile intel is charging $100-$600 plus another $30-$60 for a PCH. Its absurd to think that type of gouging will continue.

Average selling price for CPU + PCH is $120 (take PCG revenues, divide by ~80% of the total PC shipments in 2012).

The "tray prices" you see listed on the Intel website are not anywhere near representative of what the OEMs actually pay.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

You pluralized the thread title with the word "analysts" when the articles you linked clearly indicate this is the spreadsheet modeling of one single analyst.

Furthermore, the claim that "Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year" is utterly unsupported by the linked analysis.

OP is a propagandist and I've reported this thread for the above reasons.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Furthermore, the claim that "Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year" is utterly unsupported by the linked analysis.

OP is a propagandist and I've reported this thread for the above reasons.

Ya think? This guy is literally an insane AMD fanboy desperate for his warped reality to come true.

Guess he finally blew a gasket when Intel put out a quad core CPU + GT3 GPU + 128mb eDRAM that consumed half the power of AMD's best desktop APU while outperforming it, particularly at compute tasks.

 

[Phynaz]

If we are just going to start arbitrarily concocting accounting scenarios to justify a future outlook that conforms to our prejudiced expectations then we may as well call it something neat and sexy. Like strawman, or something along those line.

OMG, this is great! Mind if I use it in my sig?

 

[Erenhardt]

Ya think? This guy is literally an insane AMD fanboy desperate for his warped reality to come true.

Guess he finally blew a gasket when Intel put out a quad core CPU + GT3 GPU + 128mb eDRAM that consumed half the power of AMD's best desktop APU while outperforming it, particularly at compute tasks.

one could argue someone with the name like yours shouldn't call others a fanboys.

Lack of performance increase is not helping with sales. People may be waiting for next gen to come out, so they know where to aim with their upgrades.

 

[galego]

[FUD] is for the source: Fudzilla. At least one person got it right.

"Analysts confused by Intel's projections" is the title of the news in the first link. I am reporting the news and giving the link therefore the title of the thread is the title of the news. I believed this is standard way to report news in AT.

Intel announced on April that it expects revenue growth this year, after a decline of 5 per cent this quarter. But analysts such as Rasgon, consider that Intel projections are unrealistic. In fact the title of the other link start with "Intel's 2013 Growth Projection Doesn't Add Up".

To achieve the year's target, "Intel needs to see shipment growth of 12% to 20% in PC microprocessors in the back half of the year". Rasgon projects a PC unit growth for Intel that is flat, to down 10% YoY in the second half.

Finally, note that both server and mobile markets were also analysed, not only personal computers.

Other analysts give the same bad projections:

JPMorgan analyst, Christopher Danely, has predicted a poor growth outlook for Intel Corp. (INTC) through the end of the year. A leading provider in semiconductor chips, Danely sites declining softness in PC demand as the cause for these low growth estimates. Even the company’s continued venture into tablets will not be enough to offset this decline in its key market.
Intel shares experienced a steady decline in price during Wednesday’s session, ending the day 2.60% below open

http://www.dividend.com/news/2013/low-pc-demand-puts-intel-growth-at-risk-intc/

P.S: I will continue ignoring personal attacks.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Rasgon thinks Intel will make $53.82 billion in revenue this year, which would be a fraction of a percentage growth from last year’s $53.34 billion.

Dang Intel is doomed, that will leave only AMD!

Probably time to start looking into Radio Towers, I'm going to need a new hobby with all this doom and gloom.

 

[guskline]

Intel closes today on wall street at:
24.01 +0.13 (0.54%)

After Hours: 23.98 -0.03 (-0.12%) Jun 26, 4:00PM EDT NASDAQ real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD




Range 23.89 - 24.24 52 week 19.23 - 26.90 Open 24.20 Vol / Avg. 29.12M/39.74M Mkt cap 119.35B P/E 11.99 Div/yield 0.22/3.75 EPS 2.00 Shares 4.97B Beta 1.01 Inst. own 62%

The balance is the info copied from the Dow Jones website.

Now here's AMD's:
4.14 -0.01 (-0.24%)

Jun 26 - Close NYSE real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD



Range 4.12 - 4.21 52 week 1.81 - 6.08 Open 4.20 Vol / Avg. 17.96M/27.07M Mkt cap 2.96B P/E - Div/yield - EPS -0.99 Shares 714.00M Beta 2.30 Inst. own 53%



I'm glad my wife owns some Intel stock.

 

[Hitman928]

Intel closes today on wall street at:
24.01 +0.13 (0.54%)

After Hours: 23.98 -0.03 (-0.12%) Jun 26, 4:00PM EDT NASDAQ real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD




Range 23.89 - 24.24 52 week 19.23 - 26.90 Open 24.20 Vol / Avg. 29.12M/39.74M Mkt cap 119.35B P/E 11.99 Div/yield 0.22/3.75 EPS 2.00 Shares 4.97B Beta 1.01 Inst. own 62%

The balance is the info copied from the Dow Jones website.

Now here's AMD's:
4.14 -0.01 (-0.24%)

Jun 26 - Close NYSE real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD



Range 4.12 - 4.21 52 week 1.81 - 6.08 Open 4.20 Vol / Avg. 17.96M/27.07M Mkt cap 2.96B P/E - Div/yield - EPS -0.99 Shares 714.00M Beta 2.30 Inst. own 53%



I'm glad my wife owns some Intel stock.

While I agree with your premise, as always with stocks, it's more about timing and time frame. For instance, I took a small (not much money) chance on AMD this year and this chart (the last three months) pretty much shows my entry and exit points as compared to intel's stock over the same time frame.

 

[galego]

Intel closes today on wall street at:
24.01 +0.13 (0.54%)

After Hours: 23.98 -0.03 (-0.12%) Jun 26, 4:00PM EDT NASDAQ real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD




Range 23.89 - 24.24 52 week 19.23 - 26.90 Open 24.20 Vol / Avg. 29.12M/39.74M Mkt cap 119.35B P/E 11.99 Div/yield 0.22/3.75 EPS 2.00 Shares 4.97B Beta 1.01 Inst. own 62%

The balance is the info copied from the Dow Jones website.

Now here's AMD's:
4.14 -0.01 (-0.24%)

Jun 26 - Close NYSE real-time data - Disclaimer Currency in USD



Range 4.12 - 4.21 52 week 1.81 - 6.08 Open 4.20 Vol / Avg. 17.96M/27.07M Mkt cap 2.96B P/E - Div/yield - EPS -0.99 Shares 714.00M Beta 2.30 Inst. own 53%



I'm glad my wife owns some Intel stock.

I think that the trend is more important than a single day. For the last five days AMD(+2%) Intel(-4%)

http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp...ptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:INTC&&ei=SqvKUYCIJ8j1wAPipAE

 

[joshhedge]

I think that the trend is more important than a single day. For the last five days AMD(+2%) Intel(-4%)

http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp...ptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:INTC&&ei=SqvKUYCIJ8j1wAPipAE

How about year to year - -29.94% for AMD and -10.88% for Intel, we can play with statistics all day.

 

[bryanW1995]

[FUD] is for the source: Fudzilla. At least one person got it right.

"Analysts confused by Intel's projections" is the title of the news in the first link. I am reporting the news and giving the link therefore the title of the thread is the title of the news. I believed this is standard way to report news in AT.

Intel announced on April that it expects revenue growth this year, after a decline of 5 per cent this quarter. But analysts such as Rasgon, consider that Intel projections are unrealistic. In fact the title of the other link start with "Intel's 2013 Growth Projection Doesn't Add Up".

To achieve the year's target, "Intel needs to see shipment growth of 12% to 20% in PC microprocessors in the back half of the year". Rasgon projects a PC unit growth for Intel that is flat, to down 10% YoY in the second half.

Finally, note that both server and mobile markets were also analysed, not only personal computers.

Other analysts give the same bad projections:

http://www.dividend.com/news/2013/low-pc-demand-puts-intel-growth-at-risk-intc/

P.S: I will continue ignoring personal attacks.

Haswell release can be reasonably assumed to increase intel cpu shipments in the short run, regardless of your opinion of intel's long term viability and/or your preference in cpu company. The 2nd half of 2012 was dominated by talk of the newer/faster/better/power-sipping haswell chips that would be shipping in 2013, and I think that most unbiased observers will agree that news of this kind is likely to get at least some people to delay their imminent cpu/computer purchase by 6-12 months.

It certainly worked for me. I typically shoot for a 2 year upgrade cycle, and the 2yrs on my 2500k is up. I was a bit disappointed with the early returns on overclocking for haswell, but I now have a 4770k on the way.

 

[sushiwarrior]

You pluralized the thread title with the word "analysts" when the articles you linked clearly indicate this is the spreadsheet modeling of one single analyst.



What is also clear in this one analyst's modeling is that she assumes desktop sales will continue to trend down, in other words she has to make an assumption that desktops will be even worse in Q4 as they are now so as to make a large artificially projected revenue shortfall to which Intel must then make up by selling even more non-desktop processors.



What we have here is a classic example of confirmation bias. You clearly want Intel to do badly, and any tidbit of information you can glean from the internet to support this desire is picked up by your eyes and immediately taken as "the truth!".

What do you have here? A single analyst who has already gone out on a limb to rate Intel as "underperforming" in the past, and who is now trying to justify that rating by concocting hypothetical revenue shortfall models to save face.

You can find yourself a single analyst to support just about anything. I wouldn't be surprised if you could find at least one analyst out there who thinks the moon is made of cheese in their professional opinion.
...
You want an intelligent assessment of Intel's revenue model, not a one-off solitary calculation done by an analyst who at best can be painted as "confused".

I think you're the one who is confused. He's an analyst who was the author/head of the report, that doesn't mean he's just one guy spouting random facts - he speaks on behalf of the entire company, notice how all of his quotes say "we"?

Also, even if he is a solitary analyst, it's common sense that a PC market which has been seeing consistent declines in sales over the past while is unlikely to be able to produce a 10%+ increase out of nowhere.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Where's the source for "Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year"?

 

[sushiwarrior]

Where's the source for "Intel decline of 5% for this quarter will continue the rest of the year"?

It's what the analyst guessed/predicted. Given the past trends, I agree completely with him, and anyone else who would like to point out a reason why Intel will suddenly be selling a ton more than they used to when ARM/AMD is chewing away at their low end can be my guest.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Perhaps time to show this again:

Intels MPU revenue only dropped 1% last year. Even tho x86 was predicted to be on a deathrow.

 

[ZOXXO]

While I agree with your premise, as always with stocks, it's more about timing and time frame. For instance, I took a small (not much money) chance on AMD this year and this chart (the last three months) pretty much shows my entry and exit points as compared to intel's stock over the same time frame.

AMD earned $1.59 per share in that time frame while Intel earned $2.18. What's your point?