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 : Micron Only Forum
MU 240.46+1.7%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Thomas M. who wrote (40791)11/10/1998 4:30:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy  Read Replies (1) of 53903
 
<You are completely ignoring the numbers. High-end PCs have significantly (~100%-400%) more DRAM than low-end PCs. This is hardly offset by the incremental unit demand growth (~10%) stimulated by price drops. A shift by buyers to the low end means less demand for
DRAM. >

Show me evidence that their has been a "shift" to the low end. Sales at the low end have been largely incremental purchases by those who would have never considered buying a PC a few years ago. But really, this is another debate and not part of this discussion. We're not talking about shifts or mix. We're talking about the average price of PC's in general. The suggestion was not originally made that a "shift" towards higher end PC's would be better for MU. Of course it would. The suggestion was made that higher PC pricing was better for MU and this is what I disagree with.

Let make this clear using some example cases:

Case 1: Lower Prices

Low end PC's (8-16 meg) sell for $700

Mid range PC's (16-64 meg) sell for $1300

High end PC's (64-256 meg) sell for $2000

Case 2: Higher Prices

Low end PC's (8-16 meg) sell for $1200

Mid range PC's (16-64 meg) sell for $2000

High end PC's (64-256 meg) sell for $3000

Which case do you think is better for MU?

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