Sunny,
Mike, as anointed GG strategist,
I think folks are making just a little bit too much of that, don't ya think?! :)
where do you think JDSU and RMBS currently stand in the GG market life cycle?
I don't know enough about JDSU to make a serious comment and not a lot more about RMBS.
From the messages I've seen here in the folder, my thinking is that RMBS's product has not yet crossed the chasm. It probably will happen soon. There will probably be some micro-hypergrowth (meaning hypergrowth in a couple or three bowling pins) and it might move very quickly into widespread hypergrowth that we call the tornado. That's probably the nature of the industry for which they are providing product.
How do you, or will you recognize a jump or change in status?
Watch ther revenue. If the financials are sufficiently broken down, or if there is enough comment in conference calls, you'll be able to identify micro-hypergrowth. The top line for the company will indicate macro-hypergrowth indicating a tornado.
Based upon what you know today what do you foresee their status to be G, K or other?
Ask Cha2 about anything having to do with JDSU. He's got the gorilla-game terminology down every bit as much as I do. I think he says JDSU is a potential King.
From what I've seen here in the folder about Rambus, they seem to be in a gorilla game and are a potential gorilla in their space. However, it's a unique situation as Frank and I fairly regularly point out that their gorilla game is subject entirely at the moment to Intel's whims. Tony just expressed that others are in control too.
That's exactly what the gorilla game theory is all about, that until a product crossed the chasm and enters the bowling alley, the investor takes on a LOT more risk. There's more reward if it pans out, and it should be so because there certainly is more risk.
Sinse the GG seems to be applied to companies that ultimately have mass markets,
I'd have to read that part of the manual again to see if mass markets are a requirement of gorillas. Regardless, I'd maintain that if all the other characteristics of a gorilla game apply to a particular arena, it has the potential of producing a gorilla. I'd also maintain that all gorillas aren't the same size. If they are limited by the size of their market, that might also limit the investors' potential. But that doesn't mean there aren't gorillas of relatively tiny markets out there.
how do you judge a company like CYMI that has the overwhelming dominant position in the enabling technology for the engine that is driving the chip business?
I'd evaluate that the same way I'd evaluate companies providing technology to make any cyclical product. As the cycle of the end product goes, so goes the cycle of the product that makes it possible to make the end product.
The one exception might be that a product that makes it a lot less expensive to make the end product might have lesser ups and downs than the end product itself. But it's going to be awfully difficult to eliminate the ups and downs entirely. If you've got the best way to put together bicycles and bicycles become less necessary for whatever reason, it's going to be pretty difficult to sell more of your product in the down part of the cycle. The same goes for chips.
Does the GG model apply?
I think the answer is yes. But CYMI's product is still subject to the ups and downs of the industry it serves.
Comments from anyone would be helpful, especially if they shoot holes in my thinking.
--Mike Buckley |
