The Ukrainian Security Service SBU has published on its Youtube account what it says are intercepted conversations between pro-Russian militants in which they say they admit shooting down a civilian plane, BBC Monitoring reports
Russia could play this so differently and better if it was just to become a modern civilized western country, it could become part of the EU and open its lands/resources to presently overcrowded EU citizens and companies if it is so worried about population/brain power decrease.
Anyway this is about to get more uglier and personal ...
#BREAKING: Number of dead from crash of #MH17 more than 300, includes 23 U.S. citizen: Interior Ministry adviser, quoted by Interfax
I doubt it will make a shred of difference. The whole ruling Russian Political Class has gone collectively mad with their version of NeoCon strategic thinking and it will take a lot of reverses to shake them out of this nationalist empire disease they all seem to have caught. There is a site that translates temporary leading Russian strategic thought and you can only shake your head at some of the strange views on the world they all seem to have which bear no relation to reality as anyone living in the free world would understand it. Like Kerry said they are still living in the 19th Century when gunboat diplomacy was all the rage. Also has a good live blog every day ...
and someone was bragging about it when they thought it was a Ukrainian Army Transport plane ....
Russian-backed separatist leader Igor Girkin (who also goes by the name of Strelkov) claimed credit. "The plane has just been taken down somewhere around Torez (Donetsk Oblast). It lays there behind the Progress mine. We did warn you – do not fly in 'our sky.' And here is the video proving another 'bird' falling down. The bird went down behind the slagheap, not in the residential district. So no peaceful people were injured. There is also information about another plane shot.
Strelkov, however, apparently mistook the plane for the Ukrainian air force's. He is a Moscow native who Ukraine's State Security Service says is a high-ranking officer in Russia's military intelligence department.
It appears the Russian-backed separatists had weapons capable of downing a commercial flight at 10 kilometers high or 35,000 feet high.
On June 29, representatives of Donetsk People's Republic boasted that they took over a Ukrainian military base that had Buk ground-to-air missiles, but would not say how many.
The operational range of missiles fired by Buk is up to 25 kilometers, or 2.5 times the altitude at which the Malaysian plane flew.
Malaysia Airlines also tweeted that they lost contact with the plane: "Malaysia Airlines has lost contact of MH17 from Amsterdam. The last known position was over Ukrainian airspace. More details to follow."
Technically the stock is a bit like Bambi now, still finding its feet after such a high rise. The last known support is at 31.13 ± 0.37 which is some way away. So then it is a tale of two gaps. There is a gap overhead (which bodes well) from yesterdays close of 34.65 to today's high of 34.36. IMO that is more likely to be filled than what looks like to be another runaway gap that was created yesterday from 31.71 to 33.21 but you never know as it could go either way. Gap filling on the downside is not necessarily a bad thing if the stock immediately rebounds as it can act like a selling pressure valve to blow off some profit-taking steam.
I do not guess, I analyze and calculate. I said the gap had the potential to be filled but even if it was it would be no bad thing as the stock would then rebound and make higher levels easier. As it happens I acknowledged Alexander's assertion that it was a runaway gap about a week later when the stock rose above support at that level. I have always stated for years INTC eventually reaching high levels like 40/50 etc but how it gets there will not be one straight line although it is not doing a bad job of that lately since leaving the 26s for the last time. There is still so much more potential to be unleashed from the x86 design/fabrication pipeline yet.
Do you remember the cringingly embarrassing apology he drafted out on Ihub that he said Intel should make to its shareholders ? Wonder if he still wants it now after a 50% rise in his investment ? I told him then he would be embarrassed when he looked back at all the emotional drivel he was coming out with then. A serious lack of perspective, proportion and judgement in his thinking then.
BK and SS are doing a good job as others had predicted of under-promising and low-balling estimates then over-delivering when the time comes. It has delivered the right kicks to the stock price without much of an initial hit to the stock price. It sorted out the true longs then who are handsomely benefiting now.
The potential to unleash so much more revenue/profit/less losses from this hugely growing mobile TAM starting from this very low base of ~zero revenue mobile quarter is incredible and all that is to come incrementally every quarter starting from this very good PC/Server/Embedded quarter. It bodes well for an ever increasing upwardly spiraling revenue/profit/share price increase as more Intel tablets/phones/modems become the norm. I said before that INTC will eventually surpass its Y2K peak and it is now well and truly started its journey there having left the range bound decade long shackles of the 20s well behind now.
I believe on low volume days in this stock, market makers will accentuate any pattern until natural support or resistance is found. We are at such a natural support point now and I believe the stock will start rising again from tomorrow. Earnings should be about another 3 weeks.
'So, what's the breakeven point?
With fixed annual operating expenses of roughly $3.3 billion, the division needs to generate about $6.6 billion at 50% gross margin to break even. If you relax the assumption on gross margin to more along the lines of 60% (this should be achievable once Intel has moved all of these products to in-house manufacturing), then the division needs to do about $5.54 billion in sales to break even.'
Does not seem so outlandish to me.
Quite some doomsday scenarios you paint there. Just for some historical perspective though Earth's temperature peaked about 50 million years ago when it was 14 degree Celsius hotter then yet the human race's ancestors still managed to survive that so we could live now. Just in the last thousand years or so there have been hotter periods on Earth even though air CO2 was half what it is now yet no great ecological disasters were reported then, Greenland was green with plants, there were vineyards in Britain and Scandinavia and the Alps were snowless so Hannibal and his Elephants could traverse them etc etc.
You need to stop reading from the script and start thinking for yourself about this looking at Earth's climate and temperature throughout out its whole history to get some better non-alarmist perspective on this.
The Server/Embedded divisions also had an outstanding quarter (+19/+24%) revenue which also show the stupidity of crassly labeling Intel as just a PC company. Intel is a multi-headed Hydrant and all the strands have the capability to bite hard at any one time.
Mobile revenue was just $51m with a $1.12B net loss. So in effect Intel gave away its mobile chips to gain marketshare with contra-revenue. This may be considered a bad thing but look at it from the potential revenue/profit gain when contra-revenue disappears and more desirable 14nm products with higher asp arrive. This is a lot of future money in the bank being stored up and compressed like a spring now.
Finally let me also say that all those who said INTC will always be a range-bound stock have also been proved totally wrong. INTC can be a range-bound stock but only under $26 and I identified the 15-year old moving averages, that encompass the very high Y2K boom, that were causing that. However I argued that once over $26 INTC would move freely like other stocks and so it has come to pass with one dollar stock jumps being quite normal now.
'Civilization as we know it may be destroyed '
The alarmist force is strong with you ;-). Even under the worst case scenarios (5-10 degrees) civilization will not be destroyed. You may lose some land mass due to sea level rises but billions of people will still happily exist on this planet in a kind of warm prehistoric leafy Eden as existed during the dinosaur periods. These 'worst case' scenarios are just not going to happen though and unfortunately in the long term we will need such a temperature increase to ward off the next Ice Age due any time between now and next tens of thousands of years.
Science is about hypothesis and theories being validated by experimental/real-world facts. So far NONE of these climate models have delivered any predictions which have turned out to be true and in fact the standard response from the alarmists is to change the model each year and deliver some feeble excuse why it did not happen again. Basically the way these climate models 'work' is by assuming that anything that is not known about temperature increase is automatically assumed to be AGW. That is not science but educated guessing at best and foolish guessing at worst and is not empirical theory/experimental science as has been understood as best practice over millennia. The fact that no discernible temperature increase has happened in the 21st Century really should make objective viewers stop and think about the validity of the (pseudo)science that is purported to be excessive AGW.
I will first talk in generalities as obviously price discovery has now happened in INTC over the last year and it is good to have a recap. Intel as a company has far too much going for it in terms of leading design and fabrication IP for its INTC stock to ever have been valued as a commodity utility company as it was back in the teens and twenties.
The bears talk about the death/stagnation of PCs but PCs are a changing breed and what may have been the dynamics between a PC and mobile processor two/three years ago is no longer valid now. PC processors now have the same battery life as fanless mobile processors which obviously will dent some of the latter's desirability. This will will be accentuated even further when fanless Core-M with 2.6 GHz turbo are released so now you can have that same excess PC performance in the mobile slim fanless form factor making the traditional ARM mobile processor look even more ordinary.
Two other issues were holding PCs back. Firstly MSFT screwed up trying to force Windows 8 down everybody's throat. They have stopped doing this now with Win 7 back as the desktop default and this should be rectified even further with Windows 9 Threshold next year. The other issue has been the relative performance stagnation of the desktop high end since Sandy/Ivy Bridge. I know why it has happened, to concentrate on bringing power down to fanless mobile limits and coincidentally keeping Xeon at optimum performance/power levels you just cannot go mad on clockspeed, execution units, issue width etc. However even that is changing now with 4.4 GHz and 8-core Haswells being released so the high-end is beginning to move again now. Both Deshop volumes (+8%) and desktop ASP (+2%) were up so clearly all the fools who thought PCs were dying need to seriously think again.
to be continued ...
You was not rude to me personally although you was to another originally. I will reply in detail about INTC in another post but I would like to spend this post talking about AGW as it is such an important issue. The fundamental point about alleged excessive AGW I was trying to convey to you was that there are perfectly valid scientific reasons to object to carbon emission restrictions as there are to be for them. The science on this matter is not remotely settled as so far none of the AGW climate model predictions have come true even though they have had years to try and the real science about this won't be settled for decades to come long after we are both gone.
I just would like you and others who feel strongly the same way to be not so dogmatic and call those who don't agree with you deniers as if it was some religious heresy to dispute the consensus that has been built up. Remember a lot of these same scientists were worrying about global cooling in the 20th century which should add some perspective on the immaturity and imprecision of climate science as a scientific discipline. It also only takes one scientist to be right e.g Galileo who disputed the Flat Earth consensus of his time. From my POV there are much more important issues that mankind has to deal with like World Hunger/Poverty/Health/Peace etc and all the effort and energy and money which is going to 'combat' supposed excessive AGW is I believe misplaced and negligent as arbitrarily expensive energy for what may be little real temperature difference (less than a degree) does no-one any good. Of course the hydrocarbons are going to run out eventually and we will need more sustainable forms of energy but let that happen naturally when it is cost-effective to do so.