Intel - ein kurzfristiger Trade?
Intel wäre ein klarer Kauf, wenn man wüsste, ob es sich bei dem Marktanteilsverlust an AMD (3 % der Desktop-CPUs) um einen einmaligen Ausrutscher oder um einen sich fortsetzenden Trend handelt. Sicher ist: Intel war eine Zeitlang (technologisch) im Hintertreffen, könnte durch den Vorsprung in der 65 nm Technik aber demnächst wieder Boden gutmachen. Dann könnte auch irgendwann eine positive Überraschung drin sein wie bei Cisco, die gestern um 7,2 % sprangen.
Fakt ist: Intel ist und bleibt Marktführer, hat weit mehr Kapital, Umsatz und Gewinn als AMD und wird sich diese Position nicht kampflos nehmen lassen.
Die Situation ähnelt der von Nokia vor zwei Jahren, als die Finnen den Trend zu Klapphandys verschlafen hatten. Nokia fiel von 23 auf 12 Dollar, steht heute aber wieder bei 18 (vor zwei Wochen auf 20). Damals sahen (fast) ALLE ein Ende der Marktführerschaft von Nokia (siehe mein Nokia-Thread), weil ja nun soviel Billighandys aus Asien kämen. Die Befürchtungen waren falsch. Das könnte jetzt auch für Intel im Kampf mit AMD gelten. Intel hat wg. der 65-nm-Technik, die mehr Chips pro Wafer erzeugt, neuerdings auch die PREISMACHT über AMD, ohne selber Margendruck ausgesetzt zu sein.
Bei Nokia kam nach der ersten Gewinnwarnung, die die Aktie von 23 auf 15 Dollar schickte, ein paar Monate später noch eine zweite, die das Tief bei 11,50 Dollar markierte.
Bei Intel ist unklar, ob der Aktie jetzt noch ein zweiter Einbruch wie bei Nokia bevorsteht. Intels Vorsprünge bei den 65-nm-Prozessoren (AMD kommt damit erst im Juni) sprechen eher dagegen.
Ein Problem könnte sich ergeben, wenn der Gesamtmarkt einbricht und Intel mit runterzieht. Das ist für mich der Hauptgrund, Intel (und auch sonstige Aktien) jetzt nicht zu kaufen.
Hier der Nokia-Chart über 3 Jahre:
Angehängte Grafik:
big.gif (verkleinert auf 88%)
big.gif (verkleinert auf 88%)
Chips mit mehreren Kernen haben eine höhere Leistung bei geringerem Energieverbrauch. Derzeit sind Doppelkern-Prozessoren dabei, sich auch im privaten Bereich zu etablieren. Rattner sagte dem Branchendienst 'CNET' zufolge, Ende des Jahrzehnts würden Chips mit Dutzenden von Kernen möglich sein. In zehn Jahren könne es theoretisch Prozessoren mit hunderten Kernen geben. Für Server werde es schnellere Chips mit mehr Kernen geben als für PCs, betonte Rattner. Deshalb dürften die nächsten Intel-Prozessoren für Notebooks und Desktops noch zwei Kerne haben./so/DP/he
Trotz der guten Zahlen gab die Dell-Aktie gestern nachbörslich leicht ab, da der Ausblick enttäuschte: Er liegt bei 6 bis 9 Prozent, erwartet waren über 10.
Da Dell bislang nur Intel-Prozessoren verbaut, sind diese Ergebnisse auch für Intel interessant.
Dell beats, but...
Dell posts record revenues and earnings, but forecasts slowing growth.
By Amanda Cantrell, CNNMoney.com staff writer
February 16, 2006: 7:36 PM EST
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Dell announced record revenues and earnings and beat Wall Street expectations, but a disappointing outlook for the current quarter tempered those results.
Dell (Research) posted $15.2 billion in revenues for its fiscal fourth quarter, a 13 percent increase over the year-ago quarter; earnings per share grew 52 percent to $0.43. The company said it got a boost from the calendar's extra week of sales during the quarter.
But Dell forecasted revenue growth in the fiscal first quarter would be between 6 percent and 9 percent -- single-digit guidance that fell short of the Street's 10-percent expectation.
Dell expects revenues for the current quarter of between $14.2 billion and $14.6 billion. The high end of that range falls shy of Wall Street's expectations of $14.7 billion. The company expects earnings of between $0.39 and $0.41, excluding an estimated $0.03 cents of stock-based compensation. The midpoint of guidance also falls short of Wall Street's expectation of $0.41.
In a conference call to discuss the results, Dell CEO Kevin Rollins downplayed the weakness, and fielded questions about the recent solid performance of rival Hewlett-Packard (Research).
"HP grew 5.6 percent year on year; we grew 13 percent," said Rollins on a conference call to reporters when pressed about the company's slowing growth in the wake of its HP's resurgence. "I do think we have some tougher comparisons than our competitors... We had superb growth a year ago and some of our competitors did not."
Analysts were also concerned about the weak guidance, especially the sequential drop-off from the fourth quarter to the first quarter. Rollins attributed some of the decline to the extra selling days in the fourth quarter, but analysts weren't satisfied by the calendar-explanation.
...Dell's gross profit margin slipped, falling to 17.8 percent from 18.5 percent in the year-ago quarter.
"People were wondering if they are pricing really aggressively and not getting the unit growth they want," said Lanyon. "It wasn't a great profitability quarter. I view it as a work in progress. The Dell business model is still working, it's just not delivering the stellar results we saw 4 or 5 quarters ago."
(gilt wohl auch für Intel... - A.L.)
Angehängte Grafik:
big.gif (verkleinert auf 88%)
big.gif (verkleinert auf 88%)
Grund für die guten Zahlen von HP könnte sein, dass Käufer im gesättigten PC-Markt äußerst preisbewusst sind. Anbieter wie HP, die auch Rechner mit (preisgünstigeren) AMD-CPUs im Programm haben, können im Billig-Segment effektiver auf Käuferfang gehen.
Dass Dell gerade bei den Notebooks so gut abschneidet - Notebooks haben häufig Intel-CPUs (Centrino), daher gibt es hier keinen AMD-Preisvorteil -, stützt diese These.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "bauwi" |
Wertpapier: Intel Corp. |
Analyse-Datum: 15.02.2006
So gesehen haben wir wieder Luft nach oben.
Mit den neuen Server-Chips und dem fetten Apple-Deal, aber auch einer wieder besseren Marge , dauert es nicht mehr lange , bis wieder neue Kursziele ausgegeben werden.
Zudem wandert das Kapital aus den heißgelaufenen Märkten (Asien und Europa) bald wieder in die US-Zone. (Nachholbedarf) Wetten, dass INTC als BlueChip dabei sein wird?
Optionen
| Boardmail an "bauwi" |
Wertpapier: Intel Corp. |
war zu 17,33€ eine Woche lang drinnen und bin dann auch wieder raus, weil mich die seitwärtsbewegung nervt... es engehen einem einfach dicke Prozenre, wenn man zu früh auf Intel setzt, weil andere Aktien zur Zeit einfach besser laufen... US-Aktien/Märkte sind halt zur Zeit nicht soo gefragt, wie andere Märkte...
ich bin auch der festen Meinung, dass Intel wieder steigt, aber wann wird das sein? Der Apple Deal ist bekannt und trotzdem gurkt der Kurs bei 17,40€ rum... was soll das denn?
Ich finde es zur Zeit noch zu früh für einen Intel Kauf! .. gut ich habe auch nicht soviel Ahnung, aber so schätze ich die Situation halt ein!
Ab wann rechnet ihr mit steigenden Kursen bei Intel bzw. mit einem deutlichen Anstieg des Dow Jones?
Grüße,
broker30
Und die Währungsseite must Du auch beachten, Euro/Dollar.
Prognose von Traducer über Intel, Mittelfristig Tief 14,96€ Hoch 20,44€,
also da ist noch Luft, nach unten wie nach oben.
Gruß Daxhotte
Außerdem stellt sich mir die Frage , was mit dem Aktienrückkaufprogramm geworden ist.
Spannende Frage: Wie hoch ist die Marktkapitalisierung von Google, und demgegenüber von INTEL? Völlig unverhältnismäßig - oder?
Dies ist kein Äpfel-Birnen-Vergleich! Aber die Frage mußte einfach mal gestellt werden.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "bauwi" |
Wertpapier: Intel Corp. |
Für rund 20 individuelle DOW-Aktien habe der Bärenmarkt bereits begonnen (sie stehen 20 % unter ihrem Hoch vom letzten Jahr), während der DOW selbst - getrieben von drei Einzelwerten - seinen Höhepunkt noch nicht erreicht hat, aber kurz davor steht.
Details hier: http://www.ariva.de/board/245194?pnr=2396402#jump2396402
Interessant sind besonders die am Ende rot hervorgehobenen Passagen.
Ich beobachte Intel weiter (von der Seitenlinie).
----
ThinkEquity cuts Intel to sell from accumulate
Print | RSS Feed | Disable live quotes
By Steve Goldstein
Last Update: 8:25 AM ET Feb 22, 2006
LONDON (MarketWatch) -- ThinkEquity Partners downgraded shares of Intel Corp. (INTC) to sell from accumulate, and cut its price target to $16 from $26. The broker believes Intel is building inventories, is losing share -- particularly in servers -- and will likely be negatively impacted by pricing cuts it will likely pursue in order to stave market share losses. Intel shares fell 0.8% in the pre-open to $20.45
What's Wrong With Tech?
By Jim Jubak
MSN Money Markets Editor
2/22/2006 7:05 AM EST
It's not impossible for the stock market as a whole to go up if technology stocks don't. But it sure is hard for a short-term stock rally to turn into an honest-to-goodness bull market without the sector of Cisco (CSCO:Nasdaq), Intel (INTC:Nasdaq) and Microsoft (MSFT:Nasdaq) leading the way. That's especially true if the financial sector, that other great bull-market leader, is struggling under the weight of more-than-expected interest rate increases from the Federal Reserve.
So even if you don't own a single technology share, you'll want to know the odds that technology stocks will get it together and take on the role of bull-market leader that the sector so often assumed in the 1990s.
Here are two possible outcomes:
#
If tech stocks do lead the market, the pattern -- if not the absolute magnitude of the gains -- will look like 2003, when the technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite returned 50% and the Standard & Poor's 500 Index returned 26.4%.
#
If tech stocks continue to show only periods of modest gains separated by steep declines, then 2006 will look like a replay of 2004 or 2005, when the Nasdaq returned 8.6% and 1.4%, respectively, compared with 31.8% and 47% for the Philadelphia Oil Service Sector Index (OSX). (The S&P 500 returned 9% and 3%, respectively.)
Unfortunately, the odds of technology stocks continuing to struggle in 2006 are pretty high. If that's true, investors such as you and I need to search for the sectors or sector that will outperform the market if we're looking for anything more than modest returns.
Analyzing why technology stocks are likely to struggle again in 2006 also suggests a strategy for the years ahead. I'll follow up what is a fairly pessimistic analysis of the near-term prospects for the sector with, in my next column, a way to patiently invest now for the better returns that are due closer to the end of the decade. And I'll give you three stock picks for doing just that.
Maturation, Stagnation
So what's the matter with technology stocks?
The conventional analysis fingers two culprits:
#
The technology sector has matured, and sales and revenue growth have slowed.
#
Even after the huge selloff in the sector that began in March 2000 and ran through the first part of 2003, technology stocks are still overvalued, especially in light of the slowdown in sales and earnings growth.
#
Dell (DELL:Nasdaq), which reported earnings on Feb. 16, is a good example of both problems.
The company managed to beat Wall Street earnings estimates of 41 cents a share by 2 cents. Earnings grew by 16% year over year.
But the positive earnings surprise didn't survive even the usual cursory Wall Street analysis. A lower-than-expected tax rate -- the result of more of Dell's sales taking place in lower-tax countries -- was responsible for a penny of the surprise. And 2 to 3 percentage points of the company's growth resulted from the 2006 quarter running a week longer than the 2005 period.
And the earnings report turned positively gruesome when Dell started to talk about the rest of 2006. The current quarter, Dell CEO Kevin Rollins said, would show revenue growth of just 6% to 9%. That's big bad news at a company that grew revenue by 18%, 21% and 16%, respectively, in comparable quarters in 2003, 2004 and 2005. Earnings, the company projected, would be 39 cents to 41 cents for the quarter, flat with the January quarter and only 5.4% to 10.8% ahead of earnings for the April 2005 first quarter.
If growth in revenue and earnings is slowing to a single-digit pace, then Dell's shares at $30.38 aren't exactly cheap, even if they are down from a high of almost $42 in July 2005. After a decline of almost 28% from that date, the shares are still trading at 23.6 times trailing 12-month earnings per share.
That's certainly not a bargain price if Dell is growing earnings at 12%, as Wall Street now projects for fiscal 2007 -- or maybe less if the downturn projected by the company for the April quarter lasts longer than just a quarter.
OK, that's the conventional explanation of why technology stocks can't get a rally going. Earnings growth in these mature businesses is too low, and the stock price is still too high -- given that slower growth.
Amazon, Disrupted
But I've got a third culprit to blame. In the technology cycle, there are periods of upheaval when new disruptive technologies emerge to destroy the profitability -- and sometimes the very existence -- of established businesses. And then there are alternating periods of consolidation when companies emerge from the competitive scramble to take commanding leads in specific technology sectors, often at the expense of past leaders.
The huge technology profits of the late 1980s and the 1990s were the result of the consolidation after a competitive scramble. Today's big technology names -- Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc. -- came out of that competitive scramble with control of key and very profitable parts of the new technologies.
I'd argue that today we're in the disruptive phase of the cycle. The positions of mature technology companies are under assault from new upstarts or from established technology companies that have decided they have no intention of being the IBM (IBM:NYSE), the Eastman Kodak (EK:NYSE), the Compaq Computer, or the Xerox (XRX:NYSE) of the next wave of disruptive technologies.
Disruptive technologies are now reshaping the technology sector. Let me pick one to show you how a disruptive technology works.
The technology in this case is the Internet music download most brilliantly exemplified in Apple Computer's (AAPL:Nasdaq) iPod. The business it's disrupting is that of Amazon.com (AMZN:Nasdaq) and other Internet retailers that now sell CDs through their Internet stores.
Amazon is currently in the advanced stages of negotiation with four music companies -- Universal Music Group, Sony BMG, Warner Music Group and EMI Group -- to set up a music download store to compete with Apple Computer's iTunes, and a spring launch is scheduled.
Amazon is also rumored to be planning to sell its own branded MP3 player that would come preloaded with music selected by Amazon.com on the basis of the customer's prior purchases from Amazon.com. That would launch -- if it is more than a deliberate piece of misdirection intended to unsettle Apple -- in September. (Apple has a tiny head start, with 42 million iPods already sold.)
So why would Amazon go to all the trouble of negotiating with the notoriously difficult music industry and of launching hardware that would compete with the MP3 players it already sells online? Because the company sees the potential for online music downloads -- and the quickly following online video download -- to erode the most profitable parts of its business, the online sale of prerecorded CDs and DVDs.
In the U.S., sales of prerecorded CDs have fallen 21% since 2000, according to Nielsen SoundScan, and dropped 7.2% in 2005 alone. In contrast, 353 million songs were downloaded online last year onto iPods and MP3 players, up 153% from a year earlier.
If Amazon doesn't do something, the online download technologies for music and video will gobble up its CD and DVD business.
But investors in Amazon don't have to worry about the possibility that Amazon will lose out to the disruptive technology. Even if the company does manage to defend its turf, it will have to spend more money to do so. That means lower earnings, and lower earnings mean a lower stock price.
When Amazon announced its fourth-quarter 2005 earnings, it reported that fourth-quarter spending on technology and content -- money spent to improve customer service, offer new products and fend off competitors -- climbed to 4.4% of sales. That was 1.2 percentage points higher than in the fourth quarter of 2004. And that certainly contributed to the drop in profit margins to 6.6% in 2005 from 7% in the fourth quarter of 2004. Amazon's projected range for its profit margin in 2006: 5.1% to 6.2%.
In periods of technology consolidation, earnings growth trends get more certain, and earnings themselves grow faster as clear technology leaders emerge from the fray. In some areas, a single company -- Cisco Systems, Intel and Microsoft come to mind -- manages to corral the majority of the profits as a technology matures.
In periods of disruption, earnings growth trends get less certain. What growth rate should investors count on from Dell or Amazon over the next couple of years? And that makes earnings less valuable. Investors pay less -- a lower multiple of earnings per share -- when earnings are less predictable.
And in periods of disruption, earnings growth rates actually fall as companies either lose to disruptive competitors or are forced, as Amazon now is, to spend more to fend off the challenge of disruptive technologies.
The one big surprise in all of this to me is that we didn't get a longer period of consolidation out of the Internet technologies. eBay (EBAY:Nasdaq) and Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq), two of the most successful companies to emerge from the Internet generation, didn't get much chance to rest on their leadership positions before the disruptive Google (GOOG:Nasdaq) emerged.
I don't know whether the consolidation period for the Internet technologies was so short because of something about the technology itself -- low barriers to entry by new competitors seem to be part of the character of the technology -- or because of the way the crash of 2000 interrupted the revenue growth curve so that many companies didn't mature before the next wave of disruptive technologies emerged.
But we are back in the disruptive phase of the technology cycle.
At the time of publication, Jim Jubak owned or controlled shares of Microsoft and Yahoo! He does not own short positions in any stock mentioned in this column.
eine Tele Atlas von ca. 1 auf 35 oder eine
ADVA von unter 1 auf 7,70