Mike:
I'm having difficulty with the idea that MU can survive the "bottoming" of this cycle. My analysis (cash is all that counts) suggests that if they spend any consequential amounts on any of the "acquired" situations, or if they spend the sums required to move Boise PROPERLY into "DUV" and associated technologies, then the cash reaaally sags. Combine that with a couple more quarters of $200.0 million to $300.0 million dollar per quarter losses and add on a big interest bill to be paid, and you no longer have to even consider crooked accounting as they just evaporate in a cloud of debt-holder inspired asset sales. Only thing is, unlike TXN, Mu won't have a "buyer of last resort" to cart away the trash. Nothing on my radar scope suggests any possibility of a turn in the cycle within that period (in fact, the next 12-18 months look like Death Valley to me), hence I look for auction action in 1999. I might be a bit "early" (again), but I don't think so. Government subsidies could save the company but wouldn't turn it into a money maker, and this seems unlikely with a commodity product. While I admire the spunk and pizzazz of the company's execs, cash is key.
Even if they were to survive, what suggests that memory production will make consequential money? I don't see it in this fully "commoditized" game. Your thoughts?
.
Best, Earlie |
