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 : Disk Drive Sector Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: La Traguhs who wrote (6843)	7/23/1999 12:01:00 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

Has anyone listened to the QNTM CC yet? I found it to be a very strange call. Here we are on the cusp of a dramatic split in the stock, and there wasn't one question on it! Indeed, the questions seemed to be cut off rather abruptly. Was MB getting upset? He was talking a lot about the price war, and how he was afraid that it would NOT provoke consolidation, it would just impair profitability and investment in the sector for a prolonged time. In fact, he sounded a little like Mark has begun to sound in the past few months about this sector. He also said that "someone was trying to double their market share" by price; does anyone know who that is? It can't be Seagate; they couldn't possibly double their share from here. MB said that he doesn't think that share changed much this past quarter, everyone successfully defended it. But then he also said that QNTM reduced their buildout, as did a couple of other companies. If that is so, that is the first step to losing share, and it wouldn't discourage someone trying to gain share and provoke consolidation (i.e., bankruptcy most likely) by price, it would only encourage them, especially if it is a company like Samsung or Fujitsu who have used such tactics successfully in the past (especially Samsung in the infamous DRAM arena). Did anyone else think that somehow MB sounded naive about all this? Or am I being naive? At least one of the analysts asked him how do we get out of this, especially with the PC companies hurting the way they are, they are going to continue to play one supplier against another and get as much of a price break as possible, and MB seemed to say that they don't just buy on price, they use other considerations as well. Well, yes of course to some extent, but if the next guy is getting their drives for $10 less, you better get yours for that too or you'll be like CPQ is now, hurting. Comments please. This is just a first reaction, I'll sleep on it and see what occurs to me. Hope this doesn't appear too silly to me in the morning. Regards, Sam

To: La Traguhs who wrote (6843)	7/23/1999 12:56:00 AM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 9256

LT, "( BW)(CA-APPLIED-MAGNETICS)(APM) Applied Magnetics Corp. Announces Unaudited Third-Quarter Fiscal Year 1999 Results and Production Order for MR Heads " BW0470 JUL 22,1999 17:08 PACIFIC 20:08 EASTERN businesswire.com excerpt... Sales for the quarter declined 84 percent to $5.3 million, compared with sales of $33.6 million for the same period last year and declined 34 percent from sales of $8.0 million reported in the second quarter of fiscal 1999. Gross deficit in the third quarter of fiscal 1999 was $17.6 million, decreasing from $1.9 million reported in the same period last year. Gottfried

To: La Traguhs who wrote (6843)	7/23/1999 7:44:00 AM
From: Mark Oliver	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

<We haven't hit bottom yet. Bottom occurs when we lose a HDD, a media and a head player - not necessarily in that order.> So, the decline will continue until we see some serious blood? And, with the ability to expand production, will the loss of one player do anything except provide brief relief? Perhaps what this sector really needs is one strong player and 2 weak players to keep a little fire under the leader? Looking at APM, they could disappear and would anyone notice? Haven't they actually disappeared already, but just won't admit it? They are down to 6 million in cash from 71 million last year. Can they get through another quarter? Look at Hutch. They practically own the market (or so we often hear)and they can't make money. I believe it was Lawrence who questioned their great quarter, timed so nicely as to push the secondary out at $40+, only to see the next few quarters of loss. Did they fudge things a bit to get those great numbers? If they did, but figured they'd make it up in demand over these next 2 quarters, only to find this soft market, now we see the result. Only speculation on my part, but clearly they had something funny happen to see this about face in earnings. Regards, Mark