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

Intel Corporation Message Board

the_capitalist_vulture 472 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 13, 2016 9:52 AM Member since: Aug 5, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Feb 13, 2016 9:52 AM Flag

    The SQM board has chatter about the Chinese company CITIC buying SQM, a Chile based fertilizer company. Considering the purchase of Syngenta by ChemChina for $44B, they have the potential to buy at least 2 or 3 fertilizer companies, including CF. Once the SQM deal is announced, we'll probably see a surge in the price of CF. Apparently China is targeting "food security" in the new 5-year plan. China is the world's largest importer of fertilizers, so deals in this industry make a lot of sense.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Feb 13, 2016 9:43 AM Flag

    There is chatter on the SQM board about a Chinese gov't. controlled company CITIC interest in buying SQM, a fertilizer company based in Chile. Considering the recent purchase of Syngenta, the big Swiss rival to Monsanto in agri-chemical pesticides, for $44B, there Chinese may want to buy more than one fertilizer company. Their new 5-year plan emphasizes "food security" among other goals. At least 2 or 3 fertilizer companies could be bought for $44B, including MOS. Even if they don't target MOS, the shares could surge on the announcement of the SQM deal.
    MOS is severely under-priced, IMHO.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Sep 2, 2015 11:41 AM Flag

    We could see a retest of last weeks low in the $38-40 range.
    The market over-reacted to the OPEC editorial. The editorial suggested talking with non-OPEC producers.
    This is not going to happen.
    This explains the selloff in the oil patch today.

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Sep 2, 2015 11:19 AM Flag

    We could see a retest of last weeks low in the $38-40 range. That OPEC editorial was pure speculation, indicating they were willing to talk to "other producers" to control prices.
    Presumably, these other producers include the independent oil companies, which are unlikely to engage in such talks for fear of "price fixing" charges. The other producers would also include the Russian producers which nobody could trust to keep a bargain and Pemex and Petrobras, which are unlikely to cut production due to their current difficulties.
    It is unbelievable that the market would fall for the OPEC editorial, but it happens. There was no comment from Saudi Arabia, which dictates the current policy of driving high-cost producers out of business.

  • Reply to

    Most shorts are losers

    by bargains_galore Nov 11, 2013 11:45 AM
    the_capitalist_vulture the_capitalist_vulture Nov 11, 2013 6:14 PM Flag

    Slight drop in shorts as of 10/31 probably due to ex-dividend 11/5. Possibly the losers went right back into short positions after 11/5. The trend is definitely not the shorts' friend. $30 by 6/1 probably doable.
    JMHO, of course.

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Oct 26, 2013 3:10 PM Flag

    The internet of things is getting a lot of play lately, starting with INTC. At least, I first read about it in INTC press releases etc. Basically, it means using chips to connect everything (appliances, jet engines etc.) to the internet so that they can send out alerts or be accessed through the internet. BRCM looks like it may be a big competitor to INTC in this area. GE talks about everything they are going to connect to the internet.
    (I'm long in each of these, hence I seem to be getting a lot of exposure to this next big thing).

    Another next big thing is wearable computing with internet connections such as smart watches. It is hard to say which will be bigger next big thing, but they could both be huge. INTC seems to be powering up to play both.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    Can Intel hit 24 this week?

    by amdroaddkill2010 Sep 15, 2013 1:23 PM
    the_capitalist_vulture the_capitalist_vulture Sep 15, 2013 4:31 PM Flag

    If Jeffries upgrade could boost INTC by 3.5%, a major player like GS, JPM etc. with an upgrade could boost INTC by at least 5%. Analysts tend to be like lemmings and follow the leader: we will be getting several upgrades in the days and weeks to come. According to Yahoo, 30 analysts rate INTC as a hold or sell.
    We could hit 25 this week as the shorts panic from another surprise upgrade from even 1 of those 30.
    JMHO, of course.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Sep 14, 2013 8:18 PM Flag

    As the price went down, the short total went up. A reason for at least some of this is that "buying power" increased as the price went down, encouraging shorts to increase their positions. The GS "conviction sell" rating also encouraged short sellers. Short sellers are automatically margined, so once the price turns up the over extended shorts start to get margin calls. Even with huge volume days, it is unlikely that shorts would be buyers of more than 50%. Short covering could go on for another 2 weeks at least. While INTC is no Tesla for shorts, the numbers (5%) are still impressive.

    The analysts target of 30 is easily doable by Xmas.

    JMHO, of course.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • the_capitalist_vulture by the_capitalist_vulture Sep 14, 2012 9:39 PM Flag

    Now that MRVL has bottomed, the street is piling on with the down grades as they pile into the stock.
    Thanks to the lemmings selling, the street can buy without seriously moving the stock.
    Six months from now, the street will be touting what a great buy it is, especially after it moves above $15.00, and the sheep will move back in.
    JMHO, of course.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    Mrvl as a value play

    by qresearchq Aug 17, 2012 5:41 PM
    The_Capitalist_Vulture The_Capitalist_Vulture Aug 18, 2012 12:20 PM Flag

    Thanks. I also have a position in CSCO, but I don't keep up.
    I just go by the Yahoo listing, which is still below 2%.

  • Reply to

    Mrvl as a value play

    by qresearchq Aug 17, 2012 5:41 PM
    The_Capitalist_Vulture The_Capitalist_Vulture Aug 18, 2012 5:10 AM Flag

    Great post. I just looked at the P/E and the dividend yield and jumped in with both feet Friday.
    No debt and tons of cash is a real bonus.
    BTW, the P/E is lower and the yield higher than CSCO.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Mar 5, 2011 2:43 PM Flag

    UBS issued a sell rating (downgrade from neutral) on COCO on 11/4/10.
    By the end of the year, they increased their stake in the company by 64%!
    No wonder investors lose confidence in the market.
    They keep being played for suckers.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Mar 5, 2011 2:35 PM Flag

    The presentation occurs the Mon. before options expire. We may see a pop. The presentation is at 11am MT, or 1pm ET.
    As of 12/31/10, CS owned 762,371 shares, or over $3.5M at the current price. I suspect they probably added this q.

    Their latest research report is dated 2/2/11, issued after the Q2 ER.

    The rating was kept at neutral, despite the huge surprise the analyst received with the 2nd q ER. However, they raised their FY11 EPS to 0.92, from 0.61. 0.92 is the current average estimate of the analysts, for a very low PE of 5.51.

    The CS analyst, Kelly Flynn, is consistently behind the curve. However, considering the position they hold in COCO, which is slightly larger than Morgan Stanley's, I assume CS is not listening to their own analyst.

  • Reply to

    Fortune article posted Feb. 23

    by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 26, 2011 3:33 PM
    The_Capitalist_Vulture The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 26, 2011 3:59 PM Flag

    I'm in for the longer term.
    However, I'm expecting about $8 by 6/1/11 (after earnings in early May; a doubling from the Nov. bottom) and maybe $12-15 by year end.
    But like the man at Nokia said: "making predictions is hard, especially if it is about the future".

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 26, 2011 3:33 PM Flag

    Posted under COCO news, the article refers to a FrontPoint Partners spokesman (at Eisman's hedge fund, a unit of Morgan Stanley) who DECLINED TO COMMENT on "whether the company maintains short positions on for-profit schools".

    My guess is that Eisman and company have been out at least since around the bottom in Nov., and only dumb money is still short, the sheep that flocked in on the news.

    I checked the Detailed Institutional Holdings of COCO (at ). Morgan Stanley increased their holdings by 133.94% in the q. ended 12/31/10, buying 368,203 shares for a new total of 643,095, valued at over $3M.

    I consider it highly unlikely that Morgan Stanley would be going long on the stock in such a big way if their hedging unit (FrontPoint Partners) was still short.

    Naturally, the FrontPoint spokesman would decline to comment and set off a buying panic in this sector. However, sooner or later, the dumb money (the sheep) will be left holding the bag.

    Knowledge is power!

    JMHO, of course.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 25, 2011 9:45 PM Flag

    Thanks for pointing that out.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 25, 2011 6:42 AM Flag

    A considerable number of postings yesterday bragged about selling their holdings in COCO around the $5 level.
    Normally investors like to brag about their profits, or cry in their beer about their losses.
    My guess is that this board has not suddenly become infested with masochistic psychotics or ego trippers wanting attention.
    Call me cynical, but I suspect they were all short sellers trying to get the longs to part with their shares, and maybe even take the price below $5.
    Since the volume was probably the lowest in months, the plan of these short sellers did not work.
    Out right lying is not beneath a short sellers integrity.

    Knowledge is power.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 21, 2011 8:09 PM Flag

    It is interesting how Blackrock kept their holdings below 5 in the q. ended 9/30/10 and shot their holdings up to over 9% in the last q. Of course, COCO was a huge buying opportunity at the bottom in early Nov. with high volume, making this move doable.
    They probably continued their aggressive buying on the dips going into this q.
    They could possibly offer $8-$10 within a few weeks to take COCO private, and then sell it back to the public in a couple of years at $20-$25 when the current political uncertainty is history.
    A similar play was done with EDMC a few years ago by GS.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 18, 2011 6:57 AM Flag

    We could see an uptick in short covering today.
    Nobody would want to risk having their pants down over the weekend.
    If Kline gets his way, which is highly likely given his position as committee chairman, the shorts will be history.

  • The_Capitalist_Vulture by The_Capitalist_Vulture Feb 14, 2011 10:17 AM Flag

    These are the filings for >5% ownership:
    2/10/11 Vanguard
    2/10/11 T.Rowe Price
    2/3/11 Black Rock 9.22%
    1/21/11 Kornitzer 9.95%

    Something seems to be up!

35.43-0.08(-0.23%)Oct 20 4:00 PMEDT