SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : LSI Corporation

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (18870)6/14/1999 4:54:00 PM
From: shane forbes  Read Replies (2) of 25814
 
Again see the numerous posts earlier. Like I've said you don't understand English.

Oh so now you have gone and rounded 2.13b (recall it was 2.15b earlier) and you still don't think you are a math DUD.

Why don't you round 2.1 b to 2 b?
Or why not go the distance and round 2.1b to 0?

0.03b is 1.62% of 1.85b. When arguing with growth rates of 15% you don't round to this degree! It's pretty daft. You happily said that I was 19 million off at some point for Q4 (it was one of your crap 1.85 b posts). Well 30 million in revs is 7.5 mil per quarter. Compare 19 mil to 7.5 mil. Read the significance here. If you think 7.5 mil is so inconsequential I could just as well argue 19 mil is inconsequential! Or if not 19 mil then 14 mil. If not 14 mil then 12 mil. etc. But then I don't expect you math ability to do your kindergarten teacher proud.

Forget 2 weeks why not make it 2 decades? I won't miss your ignorant arrogance. For sure.

The truth of the matter is there is very little that needs to be said about the chip stocks at this point and maybe a while more. So shutting up is the best thing to do.

BTW the real difference between 2.13 b and 2.1 b: the first requires 10.3% sequential growth from Q1's 457 mil. the 2nd requires 9.3% sequential growth from Q1's 457 mil. - again appreciate the delta here - that is 100 full basis points. Now do you see why you should not round? Compound interest man. Compound interest with a high interest rate. Double Duh!

-- ending song: Repeat 8 --

'The base revenues for LSI were $1.85 billion in 1998. Except for a IPR&D
accounting writeoff (bogus), the Symbios assets that LSI bought were not
subsequently written off. What did take place was a $5.4 million Symbios Integration
Accrual. Per the 10-K, page 42, this accrual comprised '$4 million related to
involuntary separation and relocation benefits for approximately 300 Symbios positions
and $1.4 million in other exit costs primarily relating to the closing of Symbios sales
offices and the termination of certain contractual relationships.' Therefore it appears that
the $75 mil restructuring charge taken later was for the 'old LSI' and has very little
negative bearing on Symbios continuing operations. LSI valued Symbios at a fair value
of $804 million - $324 million for tangible assets, $214 million for current technology,
$37 million for assembled workforce and trademarks, $83 million for goodwill, and
$146 million for IPR&D (this part was written off). In this context, $5.4 million is puny
and irrelevant. Symbios' assets (read: abilitly to generate revenue) only strengthened
after integration with LSI. They did not weaken. Further, LSI has not indicated that they
discontinued anything significant in the Symbios product line. Because they used
purchase accounting (versus pooling) LSI can't use pro-forma Q1, Q2, Q3 or full-year
1998 numbers going forward. It is NOT because, as Jock mumbles grandiosely: "It
would be a terrible disservice to the company, shareholders, and the public in general.".
Give me a freakin' break.'

---
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext