A couple of interesting posts on RMBS from the G&K thread......... Bold portions are my emphasis
From: Knight Wednesday, May 16, 2001 2:26 PM
New Rambus article;
cnbc.com
FWIW,
JohnD
John,
Thanks for posting that article (sincerely). I read it with interest--even though I strongly disagree.
In fact, I think it is one of the most one-sided investment articles I have ever witnessed from a supposedly objective source. I don't claim, by any means, to be a RMBS expert. However, those with even a cursory understanding of RMBS know that the recent case has nothing whatsoever to do with RMBS patents for RDRAM (other than the reminder of the inherent risk of owning an IP-only company).
Based on this article, I conclude that either:
1. the author is extremely ignorant of RMBS
2. the author is not ignorant of RMBS, and intentionally wrote this slanted article to manipulate the stock
3. RMBS has been egregiously fraudulent in its claims related to RDRAM-related IP (to the point of justifying a shareholder lawsuit) and all the companies who have signed licensing agreements with RMBS for RDRAM have been been extremely ignorant and incompetent since they obviously didn't apply enough due diligence to see that RMBS patent claims were invalid.
My vote is for #1.
I was contemplating purchasing some more RMBS prior to reading this article, since I think the current FUD has presented an almost unbelievable buying opportunity. However, until I read this article, I wasn't aware of just how egregiously slanted the FUD is. With misinformation this bad, I suspect I might be able to get it at an even cheaper price. Perhaps I'll wait another day....
Note: If the above words sound sarcastic or emotionally charged, rest assured, I don't intend for them to convey such a tone. (You won't see much from me here, since I'm mainly a lurker.)
___________________________________________________________
From: tinkershaw Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:30 PM
However, until I read this article, I wasn't aware of just how egregiously slanted the FUD is.
Just to give an example, as part of that story (if memory serves, but I've seen this quoted by several "journalistic" sources - and it is so outrageous that its incredible that these quotes are not checked by this "journalists" (wonder if they've been to Al Gore's classes?) has been the assertion that Rambus will have to pay back royalties for royalties they've already been paid for SDRAM and DDR.
Which is about the biggest piece of garbage I've ever read and which is directly and purposely put forward as a comment to manipulate the stock downward. Not to trade but to help Infineon and Micron and Hynix in this war. In fact, I am going to try to look at the history of this FUD and check out the legal status on this. I do think several parts have systematically crossed the line here. But it will take sometime to check this out, but crap like this does get my dander up.
Lets set it straight, worse case scenario, Rambus loses every bit of SDRAM and DDR IP, Rambus still gets to keep all the royalties they've been paid in regard. THEY WILL NOT HAVE TO REPAY BACK ANY ROYALTIES!!!!!
Tinker
P.S. Keep in mind that I'm not ignorant that RDRAM is not yet the new and dominant standard. SDRAM still is, RDRAM is currently the dominant contender. But I think if you follow the value chain, look at the technologies, and look where software is going, that you can put a very good probability that RDRAM will continue forward as the next dominant standard. Nothing certain of course. AMD may yet have their way after a decade + of trying.
Message 15808933
Message 15810693
Ö¿Ö |
