doug
I dont see a pattern like first half of 2000. Looking at the beginning of the cycles and comparing K8 to K7, this time it has started a lot slower, consistent with market growth-rates, which for last quarter were slower than increased capacitity utilization and capacity-growth. Entering two slower quarters now there is good reason to extrapolate this trend, implying competitive pressure as well. In essence, I think this cycle will not be like predicted fast and steep (bubble-shaped), but slower and therefore persisting for at least two, probably three years. I guess the technological barriers ahead support a pattern like this as well: Everybody in this industry will run into the 90nm-challenges within this timeframe, preventing the capacities to overboard. For today, look at Intel, they clearly overestimated the growth for last quarter. Look at DRAM, Flash. Same pattern. No Supernova, no big bubble ahead. Healthy growth in a competitive environment instead.
Good for the industry, good for consumers. AMD common is not in danger to be damaged by any moon-collision. (Sigh, i would not mind at all if it was) Just headed for a fair value of 20 times 2005 earnings within the course of this year. Fourty bucks, maybe fifty if the growthrate will be awarded with a 25 multiplier.
Which leads exactly to the 2000 target, just later in the year. Unless the market anticipates all that and we indeed hit the 50 Bucks already next week. I wouldn't mind at all.
K.
ps: Now, I could have made the long story as short as: Peak in April-June timeframe is easily possible. As well as earlier, as well as later. I mean, as long as I look at the markets (which is admittedly only some twenty years), they never behaved like I thought it would be economically reasonably for long.
Facts are irrelevant to the emotional brain
