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: benwood who wrote (47822)	8/25/1999 4:47:00 PM
From: SeaViewer	Respond to of 53903

That even beats the old Rick Wittington, when he predicted MU would earn $17/share in 1997.

To: benwood who wrote (47822)	8/25/1999 5:04:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

>>Fiscal 2000 EPS estimates were raised to $2.50 from $1.45, and 2001 EPS estimates to $500 from $3.80.<< you are joking, right?

To: benwood who wrote (47822)	8/25/1999 5:18:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Ben, I like this part of the Reuters blurb: Gruntal said Micron continues to expand its market share, and expects it to rise to 23 percent from 20 percent through the balance of the year, while capturing the No. 1 position as the world's largest supplier of memory. It's the Mona Eraiba/Gruntal rolling MU market share estimate! Wasn't it back in February of 1999, right around the time that MU's designated conference talking point was its prediction for market share gains that Eraiba/Gruntal first started this? Same numbers. 20% market share. 23% forecast. I think the time frame was "9 months". Why haven't the numbers changed? Why is it that if you take her numbers at face value she seems to be saying that they have expended a lot of effort over the last 6 months, but have gained no share? Would MU's senior management agree with that proposition? From February to the present MU has made no market share gains whatsoever? Her "20%" estimate back in Feb. IMHO was a total crock, but that's irrelevant. It's what she thought back in February (20%) and what she thinks today (20%). Does she have an explanation as to why in the world of Dancin' Mona they have apparently failed to make any headway in terms of market share over the last six months? Other than that I think the whole thing is pretty funny. I haven't seen her report, but no doubt it's the same low-quality, low-wattage, recycled garbage she's been pumping out for months now. The only parts that probably changed would be the part where she writes something like "Our price target of _____ is justified based on a mutliple of _______ to our _____ estimate" and "MU currently trades at a discount of _____ to our ___ estimate of _______" Kinda interesting that we have gotten some very predictable answers to the "which firms will roll out their marketing associates in the wake of the Abelson piece?" question. Monday: Wu/ABN AMbro Tuesday: Joseph/Salomon Wednesday: Eraiba/Gruntal What, is there some kind of sign-up sheet over by the MU post for the daily tout? <g> Good trading, Tom