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: Zeev Hed who wrote (47854)	8/27/1999 7:03:00 PM
From: Land_Lubber	Respond to of 53903

Wow! 88 or more for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days! I presume that means that even one trade at 88 or more would make that a "qualifying" day? We could possibly hit 88 next week, as 18 points (25%) in five days is not that unusual for MU. Not only that, it is now or never. The hype-potential will not be this good again for many months. Remember Dan Niles' last (I think) pronouncement on MU? "I would be looking to buy in late August," (if memory serves here). Assuming MU is dumping inventory like mad right now, as it usually does at end-of-quarter, but this time into the best demand period of the year and at the best prices it has seen in a few months, it might have surprisingly good numbers to show by the end of September; whispers of which may be partly why the recent analyst upgrades have been so confident (less "hedging" language than usual). If all this does happen, they may be able to get their 20 days before October, or at least by the end of the first week in October. Although the markets have been audaciously avoiding a serious correction ever since January, very few (I think) seriously believe that they can make it to the end of October without one. A big one. The only thing that really bothers me about all this is why all the insider selling? Who or what could the insiders be attempting to "fool" by selling ahead of the planned run-up? Congratulations for the prescient advance warning about all this, Zeev. I can hardly believe it is really happening even now. Unbelieveable! Land_Lubber

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (47854)	8/28/1999 11:44:00 AM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Zeev, the convert conspiracy is fascinating. Assuming they went off @ par. Not adjusting for any accrued interest. Not calculating potential for cap. gains on their sale. conversion ratio (per $1000) 14.8272 shares 7,413,600 conversion price 67.44 prem 130% convert target 87.672 val of shares 649,965,139 Jun-97 Jan-98 Jul-98 Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Jan-01 Jul-01 -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 667.465 IRR (Jan 00 Conv, inc coupon) 17.11% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 649.965 IRR (Jan 00 Conv, prior to coupon payment) 16.03% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 667.465 IRR (Jul 00 Conv, inc coupon) 15.25% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 649.965 IRR (Jul 00 Conv, prior to coupon payment) 14.37% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 667.465 IRR (Jan 01 Conv, inc coupon) 13.94% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 649.965 IRR (Jan 01 Conv, prior to coupon payment) 13.20% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 667.465 IRR (Jul 01 Conv, inc coupon) 12.96% -500 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 649.965 IRR (Jul 01 Conv, prior to coupon payment) 12.32% So, from the perspective of the holders of the original converts, under those conditions, if they're still holding, I can see how they would want the conversion to occur sooner rather than later. But, they can sell the converts. If the converts went off at par and are now selling at a premium, in a way, would selling them be better? 500,000 bonds w/ par value of $1000 to get $500 mil. But if the bonds are selling @ 120 (1200), that would be $600 million. So, is there a way you could look at the cash flow stream that the guy who just plunked down 120 for and figure out when the market thinks conversion will occur? The probability of conversion? There has to be. Do I know it? Well, in the words of Bones McCoy, "Damnit Jim, I'm a turbo poet, not a quant jock!" But it has to exist. The guys at Goldman who put the deal together certainly knew it. And the guys who trade fixed incomes and convertible debt probably do those types of calcs. in their sleep. I guess my question on the conspiracy angle, is whether or not it's more a function of the quality of the work the i-bankers did on the deal. MU gets $500 mil. in crunch time, has the option of missing payments, and possibly will never have to repay a dime of principal. No one's crying over the dilutive effect of 7.4 mil. shares. There's a good likelihood that the original holders got (if they've sold) or will get a return above that of a stream w/ similar risk. Some of these firms may have nitwits writing up "analysis" that would be returned with a large "incomplete" stamped across it in a securities analysis class... ...but their i-bankers (i.e. "the real talent") are pretty smart <g> Good trading, Tom