Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Habib who wrote (24948)	7/16/1999 5:57:00 PM
From: capt rocky	Respond to of 93625

to all. intc today announced they will build and sell modems 25 times faster than analog. cisco and huges electronics are mentioned. see intc news. rmbs inside? btw, i loved jim wolfes post on lsi ad. RAMBUS / PARTNER. that is how they will market rmbs. i like it. rocky

To: Richard Habib who wrote (24948)	7/16/1999 6:48:00 PM
From: TST	Respond to of 93625

Richard, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I guess I look to future revenues growth. In that sense I am rather excited to be invested in a Company which might have earnings of $6.00 to $8.00 dollars per share in the not to distant future. From todays earnings looking forward, it is hard for me to find other Companies with real potential growth such as I see with Rambus. Even if we only go from todays levels to $6.00 earnings per share, a 2000% increase ain't bad.

To: Richard Habib who wrote (24948)	7/16/1999 8:35:00 PM
From: MileHigh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

Rich, While you may argue RMBS as a value play based on future growth, I'd argue the street may fool you. Since future RMBS growth at the end of the ramp becomes effectively equal to DRAM growth - as perverse as it sounds, I could see PE declining as rev ramps as the street looks to that DRAM limited future I agree and not many discuss this here. It is one of my concerns as the DRAM markets prices have been falling faster than demand, thus once the market is captured sales might actually decline as the commodity nature of DRAM market pushes prices lower and lower. My point, not pricing and margin control on RMBS' part, VERY unlike a MSFT or CSCO..... I don't use the Dataquest DRAM market numbers that Unclewest uses. They are completely out of this world when compared with other DRAM market analysis. Agreed, no disrespect to uncle but even Dataquest has spoken of "different" estimates, some half of the original $100B in '01 or '02 (whatever the year is)..... Regards, MileHigh PS- RMBS now my biggest position again....

To: Richard Habib who wrote (24948)	7/17/1999 7:04:00 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

>>I don't use the Dataquest DRAM market numbers that Unclewest uses.<< richard, you make some very valid points. i was provided with some newer (lower) dq numbers just yesterday. 1999...$20 billion 2000...$27 billion 2001...$43 billion the difficulties i have with forecasting can be seen in this example. earlier this week, the korean semi org estimated (raised) their 1999 dram share to $9.5 billion and projected rapid growth for next. they attribute the growth to r-dram demand and price increases. since the koreans own just under 40% of the dram market, one could fairly assume a total market of around $24 billion imo. that is actually higher than the earlier dq forecast for 1999 that i have been using ($22 billion) and 20% higher than the "new" lower dq forecast posted above. so what should i now do? go fishing or... use the new dq lower #'s, increase the old higher #'s to conform with the korean new estimate or use the new korean forecast. since the koreans now say dq's original "high" #'s are light, and the new dq low #'s are very light..is it fair to reach out and increase the dq old and new future forecasts? as i said, this forecasting is very difficult. which numbers are you using? i would like to have a second published source, if available. maybe i could just average. >>Unclewest who states the Dataquest numbers and then points out that the PC market is only 1/3 of the RMBS future<< i will attempt to reduce any confusion and explain what i have meant. first, i totally agree with your assertion that the dram market is what it is and cannot be double counted. i certainly never intended to do that nor have i ever double counted any other numbers, at least not knowingly, wittingly. second, you are correct, i have often pointed out that pc's are only going to account for 35% of rmbs revenue. i have that from the mouth of the rambus cfo, mr harmon, this year. i originally used that argument months ago to counter fud that rmbs' piece of the semi and dram markets was going to be very low and various revenue models being thrown around did not make sense. i have mentioned it again on occasion when i see folks estimating revenues based solely on pc dram sales models. the rmbs revenue forecast used by mr harmon in his briefing was essentially this. pc's 35% servers 15% other 50% "other" is for items like controllers. at least that is how i read my own meeting notes. he explained that even though the total $ sales volume for "other" will be much less than pc rdram, the rmbs % royalty is much higher, 2x, and therefore "other" will represent a significant 50% of rmbs total revs. i am taking this from my meeting notes which are becoming faded, worn and tattered. time for a new meeting? this is how i understand him...i will try to design a simple model for $100. these numbers are for demo only. pc sales = $50 x 2% = $1 server sales = $15 x 2% = $0.30 other sales = $35 x 4% = $1.40 that is how i understand it. that is how i have attempted to portray it. a number of regular members and posters of this thread attended that same meeting. at least 5 that i can think of right now. in my forecasting, i try never to use self generated numbers. i only try to make sense out of numbers coming from different directions. nice thing about that, i do not have to take any criticism personal(and i don't). afterall, they are not my numbers. and it makes it easy for me to show a source for my forecasting when asked. how about it dave b, ribman, woodside, bernardsuper, and timothy liu? how do you remember it. i will assume silence means you have the same recollection. thanks, unclewest