Broadcom shares drop as revenue forecast fails to impress
A smartphone with a displayed Broadcom logo is placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration taken March 6, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
(Reuters) - Broadcom shares fell nearly 4% in premarket trading on Friday, after the company's third-quarter revenue forecast failed to impress investors who have been extremely bullish on chip stocks amid an artificial intelligence boom.
The Palo Alto, California-based company, which supplies semiconductors to Apple and Samsung, provides advanced networking gear that allows vast amounts of data to travel across AI data centers, making its chips crucial for the development of generative AI technology.
Broadcom forecast third-quarter revenue of around $15.80 billion, compared with analysts' average estimate of $15.71 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG.
"High expectations drove a bit of downside," Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon said in a note.
Broadcom also helps design custom AI processors for large cloud providers, which compete against Nvidia's pricey off-the-shelf chips.
Global chipmakers, including Nvidia, have been vulnerable to U.S. President Donald Trump's shifting trade policy and export curbs as Washington attempts to limit Beijing's access to advanced U.S. technology.
"AVGO is ramping two additional customers, but they are still small. So the processor business will grow this year, but at a measured rate," said Morgan Stanley.
Last week, rival Marvell Technology forecast second-quarter revenue above Wall Street estimate, betting on strong demand for its custom chips powering AI workload in data centers.
Broadcom's valuation had crossed $1 trillion for the first time in December after it forecast massive expansion in demand for chips that power AI. Its shares have risen about 12% so far this year.
It has a 12-month forward price-to-earnings ratio of 35.36, compared with Marvell's 20.63, according to data compiled by LSEG.
(Reporting by Twesha Dikshit in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
3 hours ago
- The Star
Human coders are still better than AI, says this expert developer
Your team members may be tempted to rely on AI to help them write code for your company, either for cost or speed rationales or because they lack particular expertise. But you should be wary. — Pixabay In the complex 'will AI steal my job?' debate, software developers are among the workers most immediately at risk from powerful AI tools. It's certainly looking like the tech sector wants to reduce the number of humans working those jobs. Bold statements from the likes of Meta's Mark Zuckerberg and Anthropic's Dario Amodei support this since both of them say AI is already able to take over some code-writing roles. But a new blog post from a prominent coding expert strongly disputes their arguments, and supports some AI critics' position that AI really can't code. Salvatore Sanfilippo, an Italian developer who created Redis (an online database which calls itself the 'world's fastest data platform' and is beloved by coders building real-time apps), published a blog post this week, provocatively titled 'Human coders are still better than LLMs.' His title refers to large language model systems that power AI chatbots like OpenAI's ChatGPT and Anthropic's Claude. Sanfilippo said he's 'not anti-AI' and actually does 'use LLMs routinely,' and explained some specific interactions he'd had with Google's Gemini AI about writing code. These left him convinced that AIs are 'incredibly behind human intelligence,' so he wanted to make a point about it. The billions invested in the technology and the potential upending of the workforce mean it's 'impossible to have balanced conversations' on the matter, he wrote. Sanfilippo blogged that he was trying to 'fix a complicated bug' in Redis's systems. He made an attempt himself, and then asked Gemini, 'hey, what we can do here? Is there a super fast way' to implement his fix? Then, using detailed examples of the kind of software he was working with and the problem he was trying to fix, he blogged about the back-and-forth dialogue he had with Gemini as he tried to coax it toward an acceptable answer. After numerous interactions where the AI couldn't improve on his idea or really help much, he said he 'asked Gemini to do an analysis of (his last idea, and it was finally happy.' We can ignore the detailed code itself and just concentrate on Sanfilippo's final paragraph. 'All this to say: I just finished the analysis and stopped to write this blog post, I'm not sure if I'm going to use this system (but likely yes), but, the creativity of humans still have an edge, we are capable of really thinking out of the box, envisioning strange and imprecise solutions that can work better than others,' he wrote. 'This is something that is extremely hard for LLMs.' Gemini was useful, he admitted, to simply 'verify' his bug-fix ideas, but it couldn't outperform him and actually solve the problem itself. This stance from an expert coder goes up against some other pro-AI statements. Zuckerberg has said he plans to fire mid-level coders from Meta to save money, employing AI instead. In March, Amodei hit the headlines when he boldly predicted that all code would be written by AIs inside a year. Meanwhile, on the flip side, a February report from Microsoft warned that young coders coming out of college were already so reliant on AI to help them that they failed to understand the hard computer science behind the systems they were working on –something that may trip them up if they encountered a complex issue like Sanfilippo's bug. Commenters on a piece talking about Sanfilippo's blog post on coding news site Hacker News broadly agreed with his argument. One commenter likened the issue to a popular meme about social media: 'You know that saying that the best way to get an answer online is to post a wrong answer? That's what LLMs do for me.' Another writer noted that AIs were useful because even though they give pretty terrible coding advice, 'It still saves me time, because even 50 percent accuracy is still half that I don't have to write myself.' Lastly, another coder pointed out a very human benefit from using AI: 'I have ADHD and starting is the hardest part for me. With an LLM it gets me from 0 to 20% (or more) and I can nail it for the rest. It's way less stressful for me to start now.' Why should you care about this? At first glance, it looks like a very inside-baseball discussion about specific coding issues. You should care because your team members may be tempted to rely on AI to help them write code for your company, either for cost or speed rationales or because they lack particular expertise. But you should be wary. AIs are known to be unreliable, and Sanfilippo's argument, supported by other coders' comments, point out that AI really isn't capable of certain key coding tasks. For now, at least, coders' jobs may be safe… and if your team does use AI to code, they should double and triple check the AI's advice before implementing it in your IT system. – Inc./Tribune News Service
The Star
4 hours ago
- The Star
Ispace aborts Moon mission
Space setback: Hakamada (centre) waiting with members of his team for news of the expected landing on the Moon by the company's Resilience craft, in Tokyo. — AFP The country's hopes of achieving its first soft touchdown on the Moon by a private company were dashed when the mission was aborted after an assumed crash-landing, the startup said. Tokyo-based ispace had hoped to make history as only the third private firm – and the first outside the United States – to achieve a controlled arrival on the lunar surface. But 'based on the currently available data ... it is currently assumed that the lander likely performed a hard landing', the startup said yesterday. 'It is unlikely that communication with the lander will be restored' so 'it has been decided to conclude the mission', ispace said in a statement. The failure comes two years after a prior mission ended in a crash. The company's unmanned Resilience spacecraft began its daunting final descent and 'successfully fired its main engine as planned to begin deceleration', ispace said. Mission control confirmed that the lander's positioning was 'nearly vertical' – but contact was then lost, with the mood on a livestream from mission control turning sombre. Technical problems meant 'the lander was unable to decelerate sufficiently to reach the required speed for the planned lunar landing', ispace said. To date, only five nations have achieved soft lunar landings: the Soviet Union, the United States, China, India and most recently Japan. Now, private companies are joining the race, promising cheaper and more frequent access to space. On board the Resilience lander were several high-profile payloads. They included Tenacious, a Luxembourg-built micro rover; a water electrolyser to split molecules into hydrogen and oxygen; a food production experiment; and a deep-space radiation probe. The rover also carried 'Moonhouse' – a small model home designed by Swedish artist Mikael Genberg. 'I take the fact that the second attempt failed to land seriously,' chief executive officer Takeshi Hakamada told reporters. 'But the most important thing is to use this result' for future missions, he said, describing a 'strong will to move on, although we have to carefully analyse what happened'. Last year, Houston-based Intuitive Machines became the first private enterprise to reach the Moon. Though its uncrewed lander touched down at an awkward angle, it still managed to complete tests and transmit photos. Then in March this year, Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost – launched on the same SpaceX rocket as ispace's Resilience – aced its lunar landing attempt. The mood ahead of yesterday's attempt had been celebratory, with a watch party also held by ispace's US branch in Washington. After contact was lost, announcers on an ispace livestream signed off with the message: 'Never quit the lunar quest.' The mission had also aimed to collect two lunar soil samples and sell them to Nasa for US$5,000 (RM21,150). Though the samples would remain on the Moon, the symbolic transaction is meant to strengthen the US stance that commercial activity – though not sovereign claims – should be allowed on celestial bodies. — AFP
The Star
5 hours ago
- The Star
This is the phishing scam that gets an identity theft expert in the US 'really, very angry'
Digital thieves are nothing if not persistent and innovative. They keep finding new ways to try to part you from your money. Phishing – where thieves pose as trusted entities or send legitimate looking emails or messages to trick you into giving them access to your accounts – is a widespread method. And it is constantly evolving. 'We've seen phishing go through the roof,' said Eva Velasquez, the CEO of the Identity Theft Resource Center, a San Diego-based national nonprofit. But knowledge is power. So here are three emerging phishing threats to look out for, according to Internet safety experts. All three threats target key parts of people's digital lives: email attachments that lead to fake login pages, multi-factor authentication trickery and deceptive calendar invites. Spending a few minutes reading these pointers could help you avoid getting your ID or money stolen and save you countless hours of dealing with the fallout. HTML attachments that open fake login pages Imagine a busy professional who is in email action mode. In the past 30 minutes on a Saturday morning, he has filled out emailed liability waivers for his seven children's summer camps, filed an expense report for work, answered a secure portal message from the veterinarian about his sick puppy's prescription, skimmed 182 email subject lines and paid five bills from his email inbox, including a car insurance premium and his beloved cheese-of-the-month club. Amid this flurry of inbound emails, ads, invoices and secure messages, he is working on autopilot: opening messages, skimming, clicking and signing in. What a perfect opportunity. Scammers are taking advantage of user distraction – and their trust – by sending emails with HTM or HTML attachments. When clicked, those open a browser file that looks like secure, familiar login page. These pages might look like secure invoice viewers, file-sharing services like DocuSign or Dropbox, or sign-in pages to platforms including Microsoft 365. 'Once the user enters their credentials, they are sent surreptitiously to the attacker's server,' said Vlad Cristescu, the head of cybersecurity with ZeroBounce, a Florida company that helps businesses lower their rate of bounced marketing emails. Why this method is especially insidious: 'There isn't a clickable link in the email, so standard email security filters (which scan for malicious URLs or attachments like PDFs and ZIPs) may not catch it,' Cristescu added. To prevent this, he added, companies should 'restrict HTML attachments unless essential, and users should treat unfamiliar HTML files the same way they'd treat a suspicious link – don't open it unless you're absolutely sure of the sender.' If you do receive incoming communication with an HTML link or attachment, don't engage, said Velasquez, with the ITRC. 'Don't click on links, people. That's the big, overarching message,' she said. Instead, go to the source: call the phone number on the back of your credit card, visit the bank in person. Multifactor authentication tricks If you are one of the many people who uses multifactor authentication, take note. Multifactor authentication is still very helpful and should be used. But Cristescu flagged one way that scammers are taking this tool – which is designed to make people's online accounts more secure – and using it to slither in. As a refresher, multifactor authentication is an added layer of protection that prevents data thieves from logging into your accounts if they have your username and password. It helps ensure that you're the one who typed in your password when you log in, and not some scammer in the Philippines or Poughkeepsie. To use multifactor authentication, you typically download an app, such as Google Authenticator or Microsoft Authenticator. You register your sensitive online accounts, such as Facebook, bank or email, with that app. Then, every time you log into a registered website, the authenticator app generates a new, random code that you enter after your password as a second layer of verification. With the rise of this protection, a new threat has emerged: Scammers who have your username and password can send log-in requests to your authenticator app. Next, the scammer can pose as an IT expert from your workplace and ask you to approve the log-in request. If you fall for it, then boom – the scammer is in. This technique 'exploits a user's frustration and trust in IT. If you're receiving multiple (authenticator) prompts you didn't initiate, that's not a glitch – it's an attack,' Cristescu said. He recommends pausing, never approving these unexpected requests and flagging the interaction with IT. Velasquez added that if you get an authenticator notification and you didn't just log in yourself, 'That is a huge red flag. Stop and address it. Don't ignore it.' Anytime you interact with IT, be sure you're the one initiating that contact, she added. If someone from IT calls or emails you, disconnect and reach back out using a trusted method, such as the same phone number you always dial. Fake calendar invites A third technique data thieves are using is calendar invites. 'I just get really very angry about this one,' Velasquez said. 'It is super hard to detect.' Here's what to look out for. If you use an online calendar like Google calendar or the native iPhone calendar app, you might receive an invitation to an event you didn't see coming. Sometimes these meetings are legitimate. Sometimes, they are not. Scammers 'are now sending meeting requests with malicious links embedded in the invite or 'join' button. These invitations sync directly into calendars and often go unquestioned,' according to ZeroBounce. Scammers use calendar invites because they have 'built-in credibility – they're not usually scrutinised like emails,' Cristescu said. Look for meeting requests from unknown senders and vague event names like 'Sync' or 'Project Review,' he added. In some jobs or roles, meetings routinely get added to calendars by other people –clients, prospects, coworkers, bosses, peers. 'I have gotten these repeatedly,' said Velasquez, with the ITRC. 'Depending on your lifestyle and your job and how you work, these are going to be particularly challenging. They are real calendar invites. The problem is they have malicious software embedded in them – so when you click on portions of them, 'Click to join,' it's like opening an attachment (or) clicking on a suspicious link. It's the same principle.' Cristescu, with ZeroBounce, shared this tip: 'Treat those just like a phishing email. Disable auto-accept where possible and review every invite manually before clicking anything.' Never stop questioning what lands in your inbox or calendar, Cristescu added. 'Always verify the sender's email address, ensure that any link you click matches the legitimate domain, and look out for subtle red flags like spelling errors or unusual formatting.' A big picture pointer 'All three of these (scams) are so common that it has probably happened to every single person reading the article – at least one of them. That's how ubiquitous these are,' Velasquez said. She shared this broader thought: It's less important to know how to respond to each scenario and more important to pause, be skeptical, double check. It's important to be ever more sceptical, because AI makes it easier and easier for thieves to create convincing ruses, Cristescu and Velasquez both said. AI 'really helps with making these phishing offers look and sound so much more legitimate,' Velasquez said. 'And with the amount of data that is out there from public sources and from data breaches, it's very easy to see what relationships people have.' Where you bank, where you do business – that is all fodder for someone to create a copycat page designed to trick you into logging in. Adopt an 'investigator mindset,' Velasquez said. Use this helpful reminder: the acronym STAR, which stands for Stop. Think. Ask questions or ask for help. Reassess. – The San Diego Union-Tribune/Tribune News Service
