Sat, Aug 30, 2014, 1:39 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Broadcom Corp. Message Board

  • SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Give it up already, Homer. You look like a fool.
      Your posts are drivel. Go back to losing your money,
      as always. Every time I come across you on a message
      board you are defending a falling rock.

    • Well, I've tried to have a rational discussion
      with you based on fundamentals and facts, and you just
      respond by twisting my words, instead of refuting my
      facts. It's tough to debate someone with that type of
      personality, so I will bow out of this discussion
      now.

      Is your real name Al Gore, by any chance? Your
      debating style is remarkably similar to his (and no,
      that's *not* a compliment, in case you're
      wondering).


      Homer

    • >>>>>>>>>>>>
      From message #52750, by quandozane:

      >This is
      no apples-to-oranges comparison. You
      >go off
      on some tangent about what the forward
      >P/E
      will be one year from now. It has nothing
      >to do
      with anything I said.

      <<<<<<<<<<<<

      Indeed, you went on talking about what the forward P/E
      would be one year from now (based on 2002 earnings).
      Nothing to do with what I
      said.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      >The P/E
      >(that's "trailing P/E" to you, but
      just
      >plain 'ol P/E to everyone else) is one of
      the
      >most commonly refered to statistics
      in
      >evaluating a stock. Retail investors that
      >read
      yahoo's board are much more familiar
      >with what is
      considered reasonable for a
      >stock in the current
      market environment in
      >terms of this figure than
      in "forward P/Es."
      >You seek to play on this
      familiarity by
      >touting a forward P/E of 100 (it's
      been
      >guided higher) and hoping that investors
      >would
      see this as a favorable number by
      >mistakenly
      thinking of it in terms of what is
      >favorable for a
      "trailing P/E." When BRCM's
      >P/E really is 100 (and,
      of course, this means
      >trailing P/E), *then*
      BRCM will enter a range
      >of being more
      reasonable priced. But
      >according to you, a 100 P/E
      (that's trailing
      >P/E to you) is still a full year
      away, and
      >that's *if* the stock price goes
      NOWHERE from
      >here for a full
      year.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      Yeah, so where do I argue with your calculations??
      NOWHERE. I NEVER argued with your
      calculations here, I
      argued with their RELEVANCE.

      But hey, nice
      try.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>
      because I used a forward P/E in calculating a PEG
      ratio.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<

      WRONG! No, I didn't. The PEG ratio NEVER ONCE was a part
      of my comments or argument. I NEVER argued against
      using a forward P/E to calculate a PEG ratio, and I
      NEVER ONCE even made reference to PEG.


      >>>>>>>>>>
      That is investing 101 - you always, always, *always*
      use the forward P/E to calculate a PEG ratio. Oh, and
      once again, it's not "what the forward P/E will be one
      year from now," it's "what the forward P/E is *now*".
      Pay
      attention.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<

      The day anyone takes lessons from you in investing is
      the day they see their portfolio terribly mismanaged.
      Once again, and listen closely, I NEVER REFERENCE PEG
      RATIO. Got it?
      But hey, nice try.

      And as far
      as paying attention, that problem is yours. I told
      in my response:

      >Instead of "what the
      forward PE would be in
      >one year if the stock went
      absolutely nowhere
      >in the meantime" it should read
      "choosing
      >instead to look the forward PE, or in other
      >words,
      what the PE would be in
      >one year if the stock
      went absolutely nowhere
      >in the
      meantime."

      So why don't YOU pay attention,
      homeboy?

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      Next I suppose you're going to claim that you're
      smarter than me because the stock went down and you're
      still short. You are not smarter, you just got just
      lucky this time.

      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      LOL. Yeah you sure have demonstrated your investing
      prowess loud and clear for all to see! I love that little
      kid comment, "you just got lucky,
      nyaaaa!"

      >>>>>>>>>>
      Sooner or later you have to cover.

      <<<<<<<<<

      Oh, whoa is me, Homer! LOL! I'll have to cover.
      Hahahahaha.

      >>>>>>>>
      As for me, I'll be retiring in 5 to 10 years on my
      profits.

    • You wrote:
      >>Sorry, homer, but I never
      argued that your
      >>calculations were
      wrong.

      >Yes, you
      did.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      >Show me the post, Homer. This won't be hard
      >for
      you to find. Just follow the trail. Show
      >me
      the post. You can't, because it
      DIDN'T
      >HAPPEN.

      From message #52750, by quandozane:

      >This is
      no apples-to-oranges comparison. You
      >go off
      on some tangent about what the forward
      >P/E
      will be one year from now. It has nothing
      >to do
      with anything I said. The P/E
      >(that's "trailing
      P/E" to you, but just
      >plain 'ol P/E to everyone
      else) is one of the
      >most commonly refered to
      statistics in
      >evaluating a stock. Retail investors
      that
      >read yahoo's board are much more familiar
      >with
      what is considered reasonable for a
      >stock in
      the current market environment in
      >terms of
      this figure than in "forward P/Es."
      >You seek to
      play on this familiarity by
      >touting a forward
      P/E of 100 (it's been
      >guided higher) and
      hoping that investors
      >would see this as a
      favorable number by
      >mistakenly thinking of it in
      terms of what is
      >favorable for a "trailing P/E."
      When BRCM's
      >P/E really is 100 (and, of course,
      this means
      >trailing P/E), *then* BRCM will
      enter a range
      >of being more reasonable priced.
      But
      >according to you, a 100 P/E (that's trailing
      >P/E to
      you) is still a full year away, and
      >that's *if*
      the stock price goes NOWHERE from
      >here for a
      full year.

      And you babbled all that nonsense
      because I used a forward P/E in calculating a PEG ratio.
      That is investing 101 - you always, always, *always*
      use the forward P/E to calculate a PEG ratio. Oh, and
      once again, it's not "what the forward P/E will be one
      year from now," it's "what the forward P/E is *now*".
      Pay attention.

      Next I suppose you're going to
      claim that you're smarter than me because the stock
      went down and you're still short. You are not smarter,
      you just got just lucky this time. Sooner or later
      you have to cover. As for me, I'll be retiring in 5
      to 10 years on my profits.


      Have a nice
      day.

      Homer

    • Homer gave us this fodder for
      laughs:

      >>>>>>>>>>>
      Big difference between a rating downgrade and lowered
      estimates. Did Merrill change their earnings estimates? No,
      they did not. They downgraded to accumulate based on
      inventory concerns, not valuation. Inventory is a
      short-term problem.

      <<<<<<<<<<<<<

      No wonder you are so lousy at grasping fall BRCM has
      had in store. Merrill DOWNGRADED because of
      valuation, period. Inventory is a hole that can plague, and
      it affects earnings expectations. Earnings
      expectations have been lowered, and thus BRCM was downgraded
      due to valuation concerns. VALUATION IS ALWAYS THE
      REASON FOR DOWNGRADES. GET A CLUE! A STOCK THAT IS
      THOUGHT TO BE PRICED FAIRLY DOESN'T GET
      DOWNGRADED.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      When that problem goes away, they will upgrade it
      again to a buy.

      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      Don't hold your breath,
      bub.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      But, as I said previously, buy-sell-hold
      recommendations are bullshit. It's the earnings estimates that
      matter. Those have not
      changed.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      For the next quarter only! BEYOND Q4, EARNINGS
      OUTLOOKS HAVE ABSOLUTELY CHANGED!


      >>>>>>>>>>>>>
      You wrote:
      >Sorry, homer, but I never argued
      that your
      >calculations were wrong.

      Yes,
      you
      did.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      Show me the post, Homer. This won't be hard for you to
      find. Just follow the trail. Show me the post. You
      can't, because it DIDN'T HAPPEN. You just keep digging
      yourself into a bigger and bigger credibility
      hole.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      And I still stand by my statement that the correction
      is over, or very nearly so. BRCM will be range-bound
      for a few weeks here (140-170 or so), then head
      higher along with the
      market.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Nice call, Homer. I'm sure readers will be really
      anxious to hear any predictions you have in the future.
      You've been so remarkable as a contrary indicator. LOL.

    • Big difference between a rating downgrade and
      lowered estimates. Did Merrill change their earnings
      estimates? No, they did not. They downgraded to accumulate
      based on inventory concerns, not valuation. Inventory
      is a short-term problem. When that problem goes
      away, they will upgrade it again to a buy. But, as I
      said previously, buy-sell-hold recommendations are
      bullshit. It's the earnings estimates that matter. Those
      have not changed.

      You wrote:
      >Sorry,
      homer, but I never argued that your
      >calculations
      were wrong.

      Yes, you did.

      And I still
      stand by my statement that the correction is over, or
      very nearly so. BRCM will be range-bound for a few
      weeks here (140-170 or so), then head higher along with
      the market.


      Homer

    • Homer
      wrote:

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      You wrote:
      >I never made reference to a PEG
      ratio.

      But I did, and you are saying that my calculations
      are all wrong because I used a forward p/e. You
      always, always, *always* use a forward p/e to calculate a
      PEG ratio. Plug in your brain and read that post
      again.
      <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

      Did it never occur to you before you made a statement
      like that to go back a read the posts yourself? If
      only you had, you would have avoided making an ass of
      yourself with that "plug in your brain" comment. Too late
      now. Sorry, homer, but I never argued that your
      calculations were wrong. I think you are the one that needs to
      do some rereading.

      Here this will help
      you:
      ++++++++++++++++++++
      >>Name an analyst who has changed his or her
      >>2001 estimates based on this
      information.
      >>
      >>You have seriously underestimated the value of this
      company.
      >>
      >>Homer
      >
      >
      >Ps. Shoulda covered that short last week, huh?

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

      That's one's a classic of course. Can you say "Merrill
      Lynch?"

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Re: Quandozane, re: lower guidance
      by: quandozane
      11/15/00 11:12 am
      Msg: 52595 of 52829

      ". Name
      an analyst who has changed his or her 2001 estimates
      based on this information."


      You will have no
      problem finding one, but only AFTER they've dumped all
      they want.

      The downgrades are indeed coming

      ]]]]]]]]]]]

      Re: Quandozane, re: lower guidance
      by: quandozane
      11/15/00 12:49 pm
      Msg: 52623 of 52829


      >>>>>>>>
      Why would they "dump" down here in the 170s, when
      they could wait a little while and sell much
      higher?<<<<<<<<<

      Says
      who?

      >>>>>>>
      Better yet, why didn't they "dump" the day the company
      "lowered guidance" as you
      say?<<<<<<<<

      Who says they haven't been? I suggest you take a look
      at the chart. Big boys can play the pump and dump
      gain to optimize their returns and minimize losses.
      Selling into strength is the name of the game, strength
      whereever you can find it. See the descending highs? Sell
      into strength, wait for rebound after resulting
      momentum swing, sell some more.

      Once they've
      unloaded all they want, the appropriate downgrades are
      issued, more selling occurs, and they can then jump back
      in when the stock is properly
      valued.
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

      Oh, and of course, here's a taste of how credible
      your advice
      is:

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      The correction already happened, my man - where ya
      been? The last stocks to correct are the ones that held
      up the longest. Now that that has happened, we are
      in the end stages of this market correction. Might
      go sideways or even a little down over the next few
      weeks, but once the prez situation is sorted out, the
      market and BRCM will head higher.

      If you're going
      short now, you've missed the boat. Get over
      it.

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++


      I have the feeling you hear that phrase "missed the
      boat" a lot.


      You have a swell day, now.

    • You wrote:
      >I never made reference to a PEG
      ratio.

      But I did, and you are saying that my calculations
      are all wrong because I used a forward p/e. You
      always, always, *always* use a forward p/e to calculate a
      PEG ratio. Plug in your brain and read that post
      again.


      Homer

    • Quand: I have to agree with you on your
      definition of what "p/e" means to the general investment
      community- it is based on TRAILING earnings, no doubt about
      it (p/e on future earnings would clearly be an
      exception to the rule)

      As far as your comment that
      the p/e of BRCM is too high, you may or may not be
      right. With current market conditions one would not be
      foar off feeling that way, however, IMO, we mot likely
      will see the share price return to 230-250 within 30
      days. With Bush in the white house, a POSSIBLE interest
      rate cut by the fed in Jan., we could be over 300,
      regardless of p/e. There is just too much growth happening
      with BRCM to hold it back (unless ALGORE is succesful
      tying up the election in the courts).

      The market
      will always value the gorilla or emerging gorilla way
      above its competitors- its a historic fact. What is'nt
      fact as of yet, IMO, is that BRCM is a gorilla. Only
      time will tell.

      I project qtr to qtr growth in
      earnings to be at least 20% per quarter for the next 4-6
      quarters. If true, BRCM will double in less than a
      year.

      I have loaded up on many shares of BRCM, thanks to
      ALGORE and his attempt to steal the election. BRCM will
      be over 210 by Thanksgiving.

      If you are short
      I would go long tomorrow!

      Good
      Luck.

      capitalistguy

    • "You never, *ever* use a trailing p/e in
      reference to a PEG ratio. Ever."

      I never made
      reference to a PEG ratio.

      "The correction already
      happened, my man - where ya been? The last stocks to
      correct are the ones that held up the longest. Now that
      that has happened, we are in the end stages of this
      market correction. "

      Wrong. The downtrend is in
      place, BRCM remains grossly overvalued, and the
      correction will continue.

      "If you're going short now,
      you've missed the boat. Get over it. "

      I've
      nothing to get over. But you'll have to get over the fact
      that BRCM is way overvalued. Simple truth. Way
      overvalued
      and its time in the sun is over. Overvalued is out.

    • View More Messages
 
BRCM
39.38+0.18(+0.46%)Aug 29 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.