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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Beers who wrote (47800)	8/24/1999 10:05:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Ed, that's a reasonable assumption and a good point to raise. But here's what he said about contract pricing: Contract pricing remains firm in the $5.50-6.50 range, with an upward bias in the last couple of weeks [8/17/99] Contract pricing has also been moving up. Two weeks ago, Micron boosted its contract price to $5.00 and is now seeking to push contract prices to the $5.50-6.00 range. [8/6/99] In the past week, prices for 64Mb DRAM have increased by about 30% in overseas markets and by about 15% in the U.S. to about $4.90-$5.00, which is still below contract prices, which is currently about $5.50. [7/13/99] Fine. Apparently MU's contracts were below spot and/or overall contract pricing. But if you assume they'll sell 25-30% spot and spot has moved dramatically from the point when his Q499 estimate was set at -.20 (6/24), then you also read his own statements regarding MU increasing their contract prices ("two weeks ago" from 8/6/99 would be around 7/23), you assume their Q ends 9-2-99 (?)... Where does that put you on the John Joseph timeline? His estimate of -.20 made on 6/24 would have occurred with 10 weeks to go in the quarter. At that point, the past is sunk. The issue is what this person sees going forward w/ 10 weeks to go left in the quarter. What he sees on 6/24 is an ASP of 4.50 for Q499 based on his assumption that the downward trend will continue. However, if they raised contract prices "two weeks" ago from 8/6/99, that would mean that they raised prices with 60% of the remainder of the Q from 6/24 on. He comes out later (8/17/99) saying that contract pricing remains firm in the 5.50-6.50 range. He writes that with 30% of the Q from 6/24 on remaining. He is obviously well aware of the spot. He is obviously well aware of the contract. He presumably knows when their Q ends (more than I do; for all I know it's not 9/1-9/2, but a week earlier). And yet, despite all that, we have the Jupiter Effect. Whatever increase in the spot from 6/24 onwards and increase in their contracts from 6/24 onwards was miraculously off-set by some unspecified downside. We'll see. I know I'm busting his stones here on this issue, but I think it's justified. I guess I'm also in the strange position of finding fault with the analyst fringe yacking about the spot prices when they know fully well that contracts play such a key role AND criticizing a guy who's Q499 estimate is .02 below the consensus of -.18 for not raising it if through brute reason you can make a case that it is somewhat strange for his Q499 numbers to fail to match his stated observations. I still think I can the two-front war. As long as it doesn't involve an extended march into the Russian heartland with winter approaching <g> Good trading, Tom