Business analyst Jeffries says AMD could triple it's market share admidst Intels supply problem

[Nicnac]

I heard intel is building a completely new 14nm factory in 'Nam.....

[Master Disaster]

2 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Did any of them ever have 90%+ market share, pick up ALL the exclusives and essentially dominate across decades? I guess the answer is no.

And? That's rather the point I was making, past and current performance has zero impact on future performance.

 

You could argue that after the north American video game crash Nintendo basically had 100% of the NA market for a considerable time yet they no longer have that success.

 

Things change and it only takes one mistake to undo everything you did in the past.

[Trixanity]

36 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

And? That's rather the point I was making, past and current performance has zero impact on future performance.

 

You could argue that after the north American video game crash Nintendo basically had 100% of the NA market for a considerable time yet they no longer have that success.

 

Things change and it only takes one mistake to undo everything you did in the past.

If the market was similar and the conditions were similar which they're not. 

It would take decades of poor execution from Intel to become like AMD. 

 

So the answer is still no.

[ZacoAttaco]

9 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

And? That's rather the point I was making, past and current performance has zero impact on future performance.

 

You could argue that after the north American video game crash Nintendo basically had 100% of the NA market for a considerable time yet they no longer have that success.

 

Things change and it only takes one mistake to undo everything you did in the past.

It's true, it doesn't matter what you've done, it matters what you are doing. Exactly like you mentioned with the transition from the loved Xbox 360, to the less liked Xbox One. It doesn't matter what happened in the past, what matters is the now.

[Yoinkerman]

300% gains sounds like a big fat fib

[Fred Castellum]

Welp here I come again in a stock market related topic with my darn charts and whatnot. 

 

On 9/23/2018 at 3:37 AM, PineyCreek said:

...and realistically their stock is worth somewhere between 15 and 20.  They have a stronger product line now, with some awesome partner deals they didn't have before, but they still have debt, nVidia's more or less spanking them with GPU sales, and they don't have the same R&D and fab money Intel does.  EPS is still negative.  I'll buy their stock again when it drops.  AMD's a good company, but I think their stock price is fueled by hype, histrionics and insanity.  You can extend that thinking to how their business is doing overall.  I bet reality sets in, only to be tossed out the window again when they finally confirm AMD's hardware is present in the retail versions of the PS5 and new MS console.

I can say with confidence your absolutely right about how AMD's stock is driven by hype, I've been trading them since they were $2 a share. AMD has been such a bullish stock lately a break on support may not even signal a strong confirmation of it dropping to the downside.... 

 

MACD indicator crossover along with a dropping CCI and a break below the blue SMA midpoint line on the chart typically all signals a start to a downtrend yet it manages to hold on. 

 

AMD just kept going after finally breaking through the $15 - $16 resistance mark a couple of months back.

 

On 9/23/2018 at 4:38 AM, Tech Enthusiast said:

When was the last time one of those "Business analysts" or "stock experts" predicted something correctly, that also did not include already available facts, for the tech industry?

 

While I would love to see AMD getting a push, I doubt Intel suddenly can't produce enough.

They did not close down any factories, so they can produce as much as before. The only way they may not be able to fulfill the demand is, if the demand skyrocketed.

 

So, losing market share due to higher than expected demand for THEIR chips? I don't really see how that is happening. That would mean the market is suddenly expanding as a whole. And that is not usually going fast enough for any company to gain any meaningful market share.

Also companies don't just buy something other than they wanted, just because they need to wait a week or two for it to ship.

Heh always take analytical reports from "Business Analysts" and "Stock Analysts" with a grain of salt. There are not many out there worth your time or money to bother reading and following. 

 

On 9/23/2018 at 4:41 AM, leadeater said:

Market analysts have to do something otherwise they would look useless and people would start to question their pointless existence .

 

*Throws random facts and wild theories up in the air*, when do I get my pay check?

The sad reality of how easy it is to become a "Market Analyst" these days creates a whole lot of garbage to shift through. If you really must find someone to rely on for investment advice on a specific industry your better off finding a stock trader who is specialized in that particular sector of the market than going to some big shot "Market Analyst".

 

On 9/23/2018 at 4:45 AM, Master Disaster said:

That sentence describes analysts in general. Michael Pachter has a 54% success rating yet whenever he opens his mouth the entire gaming press is falling over themselves to print his predictions.

Analysts have so much leeway.... you really only have 3 predictions to put out for a company your analyzing.... It'll go UP, It'll go DOWN, It'll STAY here.... If a analyst has a success rating of below 40% then they are some of the bottom of the barrel "experts".

 

On 9/23/2018 at 4:33 PM, mr moose said:

I wonder how many analysts actually flip coins to decide how their article is going to be written?

It's probably more along the lines of what sort of mood they're in on that given day. 

 

22 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

PSA: stock-picking is gambling (inb4 videogames implement stock-picking and enter endless lawsuits in Europe ).

 

 

Edit: also notice that "can go as high as XX", as a possible event with a certain probability, is already taken into account by the current price, which will adjust mildly if the underlying distribution of probabilities changes. So it is a bit of clickbait by the original source.

I'll have to disagree with you here. Stock-picking ≠ Gambling

 

There are a lot of factors that separate the two, but I won't bore you with all that snazz here. 

 

On 9/23/2018 at 5:40 AM, mr moose said:

I have always said AMD have been shooting themselves in the foot.  They keep developing things that they either giveaway or turn into an open source type deal trying to buy sales.  It kinda works sometimes (freesync has a good adoption rate), everyone thinks it's great that they made freesync a semi free alternative to gsync and that opengl, vulcan and mantle etc were all out there for anyone to use.  But at the end of the day if you give everything away how are you going to pay for the development of new products?  I believe there is a reason Intel and nvidia make more money than they do and it has a little more to do with running a business than a charity.

All three of those companies have a long history of pulling anti-consumer and anti-technology practices for the goal of getting the edge against the other on profits, it's just that some of the have played the game better than others. 

 

The current semiconductor and nand memory manufacturing industry is a good example, the number of these companies still around have dropped drastically compared to 10 - 20 years ago.

 

On 9/23/2018 at 7:09 AM, asus killer said:

you guys are being unfair. If he predicted more than that he would either have a working time machine or would be in jail for inside information. They just present the facts, and they do a good job at that. The prediction part is to be taken with lots of salt. Still there are guys that actually made some real money prediction stocks for themselves and others.

Nah, as a trader I'd say it's fair. We long time stock traders joke about and shit on market analysts and whatnot on the daily and for good reason. 

[PineyCreek]

4 minutes ago, MyInnerFred said:

Welp here I come again in a stock market related topic with my darn charts and whatnot. 

 

I can say with confidence your absolutely right about how AMD's stock is driven by hype, I've been trading them since they were $2 a share. AMD has been such a bullish stock lately a break on support may not even signal a strong confirmation of it dropping to the downside.... 

 

MACD indicator crossover along with a dropping CCI and a break below the blue SMA midpoint line on the chart typically all signals a start to a downtrend yet it manages to hold on. 

 

AMD just kept going after finally breaking through the $15 - $16 resistance mark a couple of months back.

 

Heh always take analytical reports from "Business Analysts" and "Stock Analysts" with a grain of salt. There are not many out there worth your time or money to bother reading and following. 

 

The sad reality of how easy it is to become a "Market Analyst" these days creates a whole lot of garbage to shift through. If you really must find someone to rely on for investment advice on a specific industry your better off finding a stock trader who is specialized in that particular sector of the market than going to some big shot "Market Analyst".

 

Analysts have so much leeway.... you really only have 3 predictions to put out for a company your analyzing.... It'll go UP, It'll go DOWN, It'll STAY here.... If a analyst has a success rating of below 40% then they are some of the bottom of the barrel "experts".

 

It's probably more along the lines of what sort of mood they're in on that given day. 

 

I'll have to disagree with you here. Stock-picking ≠ Gambling

 

There are a lot of factors that separate the two, but I won't bore you with all that snazz here. 

 

All three of those companies have a long history of pulling anti-consumer and anti-technology practices for the goal of getting the edge against the other on profits, it's just that some of the have played the game better than others. 

 

The current semiconductor and nand memory manufacturing industry is a good example, the number of these companies still around have dropped drastically compared to 10 - 20 years ago.

 

Nah, as a trader I'd say it's fair. We long time stock traders joke about and shit on market analysts and whatnot on the daily and for good reason. 

I did about the same.  Bought a little over 3 years ago just under 2.  Sold around 31.5.  I'm sure it'll go up some more, but I didn't want any further chances of grabbing an ulcer over it.  I only survive playing the market by considering everything monopoly money until I hold it in my hand.

[Fred Castellum]

3 minutes ago, PineyCreek said:

I did about the same.  Bought a little over 3 years ago just under 2.  Sold around 31.5.  I'm sure it'll go up some more, but I didn't want any further chances of grabbing an ulcer over it.  I only survive playing the market by considering everything monopoly money until I hold it in my hand.

If you want some extra peace of mind you could always set a stop loss order to go off at a acceptable loss price or if it's already gone up, set it up at a price in which if it sells off you'll still be making a profit. 

[PineyCreek]

2 minutes ago, MyInnerFred said:

If you want some extra peace of mind you could always set a stop loss order to go off at a acceptable loss price or if it's already gone up, set it up at a price in which if it sells off you'll still be making a profit. 

That's pretty much what I did.  Stop limit on quote and followed the stock all the way up.  It only sold when there was a particularly bad dip.  I gave it plenty of room to move otherwise.

[leadeater]

51 minutes ago, MyInnerFred said:

The sad reality of how easy it is to become a "Market Analyst" these days creates a whole lot of garbage to shift through. If you really must find someone to rely on for investment advice on a specific industry your better off finding a stock trader who is specialized in that particular sector of the market than going to some big shot "Market Analyst".

I'm still super salty I didn't invest in AMD stock. I knew it would go up, well in advance, I had the time to look in to it but nooo I was too lazy .

[PineyCreek]

19 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I'm still super salty I didn't invest in AMD stock. I knew it would go up, well in advance, I had the time to look in to it but nooo I was too lazy .

Look on the bright side.  I told my dad he should invest in Apple about the time the gen 2 iPod came out.  He didn't listen.

[Phentos]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I'm still super salty I didn't invest in AMD stock. I knew it would go up, well in advance, I had the time to look in to it but nooo I was too lazy .

I feel you on that one. 

 

I was going to invest back in mid-late 2016 but was persuaded not to. Still a bit salty about that today.

[spartaman64]

On 9/24/2018 at 5:33 AM, mr moose said:

I wonder how many analysts actually flip coins to decide how their article is going to be written?

 

Maybe,  but even back in 2016 there were considerably more freesync monitors on the market than Gsync (20 to 85), and although I can't find the actual article anymore I thought they were outselling Gsync to a similar degree.  With nvidia making more money from less sales even if AMD had a token amount on each monitor sold they would have at least been able to cover their costs.  

Also free sync helps them indirectly if they can rely on the fact that Nvidia won't adopt it which it seems like they can. People who bought a free sync monitor have extra pressure to buy an amd gpu

[Tech Enthusiast]

2 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

Also free sync helps them indirectly if they can rely on the fact that Nvidia won't adopt it which it seems like they can. People who bought a free sync monitor have extra pressure to buy an amd gpu

That is actually pretty funny to see sometimes.

People buying AMD GPUs for a free sync pannel, that does not even have the sync range they need. (like a 144hz 4k panel, then claiming a 470 is a great buy due to free sync)

[SpaceGhostC2C]

10 hours ago, MyInnerFred said:

I'll have to disagree with you here. Stock-picking ≠ Gambling

 

There are a lot of factors that separate the two, but I won't bore you with all that snazz here. 

 

The crowd at the races agrees with you, on a faith basis.

 

Empirically, however, it's hard to overcome weak versions of the efficient-market hypothesis, although large investment funds do manage to profit from "arbitrage trading" (investing billions in slightly mispriced assets for the short time the inefficiency lasts).

Individuals insisting "they just know" this stock will go up this much with a probability higher than assessed by the market are no different from those telling you that horse is a steal at those odds...

[mr moose]

13 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

Also free sync helps them indirectly if they can rely on the fact that Nvidia won't adopt it which it seems like they can. People who bought a free sync monitor have extra pressure to buy an amd gpu

This is true, although it doesn't appear to be bearing out in the GPU sales just yet.  For now at best freesync has helped keep their GPU sales from dropping any further.