$AMD was at $0.15, AMD was the only company besides Intel that actually had x86-64 patents. Intel would have never let AMD fail because they would be a monopoly and that is worse than leading a duopoly.
Notice the bean counter Intel ceo, the yields getting worse over time, the performance not improving besides a 1-2% year over year and Intel getting complacent, repeatedly to screwing over the customer with requirement of buying a new motherboard with every new release.
AMD was a steal for anyone in the know.
Counter argument 2:
Any price target posted by Citron was wrong.
Counter argument 3:
Why would any analyst give a proper price target when they can screw you over?
These remarks are presented for the interest of passerbys, not because the comment I reply to has merit and deserves them.
Counterpoint 1: AMD was a chipmaker with skilled engineers on staff and a growth story where they could seize market share with better technology. Gamestop is a retailer with retail clerks on staff and a story where increasing competition from PC and console app stores slowly eats away at their market share. Exact same thing, right?
Counterpoint 2: Saying the price target is wrong is one thing, and may in many circumstances be eminently defensible. Saying the correct price is $50-$150 is another.
Counterpoint 3: This exemplifies the thinking going on here. "I don't understand the stock market and think someone is screwing us over. Let's define our own alternate reality, and gang up on them for revenge! Revolution!" Last time we saw that show was January 6. For a few people, who get out at the right time, this will be a much more successful revolution, but on the whole, it succeeds only with a transient disruption, and harm the individual would-be revolutionaries the most.
> These remarks are presented for the interest of passerbys, not because the comment I reply to has merit and deserves them.
Ouff.
> AMD was a chipmaker with skilled engineers on staff and a growth story where they could seize market share with better technology. Gamestop is a retailer with retail clerks on staff and a story where increasing competition from PC and console app stores slowly eats away at their market share. Exact same thing, right?
Do your due diligence this is just one, https://www.gmedd.com, there have been many others and they all converge to the same argument. GME is worth much more than the $10 PT given by analysts.
> Counterpoint 2: Saying the price target is wrong is one thing, and may in many circumstances be eminently defensible. Saying the correct price is $50-$150 is another.
Except citron was wrong in every single price target they have given by more often than not an order magnitude, except for 1. If you pay enough attention, you will see that many of the same 'pages' play both the bull and bear game, if only to come out and say they were correct.
> Counterpoint 3: This exemplifies the thinking going on here. "I don't understand the stock market and think someone is screwing us over. Let's define our own alternate reality, and gang up on them for revenge! Revolution!"
Had you done your due diligence and paid attention to the situation as it unfolded, you'd have seen that the market made sense, the stock was over shorted and in no way reflective of the actual price targets created by various models and analyses such as the one I linked above.
> Last time we saw that show was January 6. For a few people, who get out at the right time, this will be a much more successful revolution, but on the whole, it succeeds only with a transient disruption, and harm the individual would-be revolutionaries the most.
We saw that show in every single revolution. This only reinforces the belief that the average proletariat is getting screwed over and manipulated by the same class of people. Hint, it was the proletariat that paid for the greed, not the institutions, the hedge funds or the MMs. It is the proletariat that are stuck between a rock and a hard place, it is the proletariat that are getting manipulated into intra class wars.
$AMD was at $0.15, AMD was the only company besides Intel that actually had x86-64 patents. Intel would have never let AMD fail because they would be a monopoly and that is worse than leading a duopoly.
Notice the bean counter Intel ceo, the yields getting worse over time, the performance not improving besides a 1-2% year over year and Intel getting complacent, repeatedly to screwing over the customer with requirement of buying a new motherboard with every new release.
AMD was a steal for anyone in the know.
Counter argument 2:
Any price target posted by Citron was wrong.
Counter argument 3:
Why would any analyst give a proper price target when they can screw you over?