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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (7090)	9/26/1999 12:21:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Art, I was reading the SEC filings today and see that the secondary offering price was estimated to be $67.19, whereas others have stated that this was left intentionally blank at the initial filing (if my memory serves me correctly). Title of Each Class Aggregate Amount of Securities Maximum Offering Price Net Common Stock 3,450,000 shares $67.19 $231,805,500 ($0.001 par value) Is it possible that we have gravitated to the mid-60's on the basis of shares being sold ("turned over") following the secondary (which happened to coincide with the earthquake?). Perhaps this could explain the extraordinary volume on Friday. Also, is the underwriter required to buy back shares sold by private clients involved in the offering if shares are sold within "x" days of the sale? Should we have seen this coming? freeedgar.com Ausdauer

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (7090)	9/26/1999 12:26:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Thread, Sorry. Could not post the SEC URL as a hot link. Ausdauer

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (7090)	9/26/1999 12:30:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

freeedgar.com

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (7090)	9/26/1999 12:31:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Damned link. Ausdauer

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (7090)	9/26/1999 11:04:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Art, I can see a lot of problems trying to work with Toshiba, a competitor, to obtain extra supplies. This sort of reminds me of Polaroid, which allowed Kodak to produce most of its film in the 1960's and 1970's. I share the same view. I was just throwing out the idea now that the SD project was announced. Toshiba must have some technology that will really soup up the MMC, as they have hinted. Also, it seems that Eli is trying to limit the company's interdependence on larger competitors that could squash SNDK like a bug if so inclined. They probably trust Toshiba as far as they can throw them. Also, I think that Eli and Co. support the notion of extremely tight quality control and rapid technology advancement. They get that at UMC. They are really light on their feet. And you just don't get that by buying leftovers on the street. (It reminds me of a special on PBS where a NYC jewelery dealer goes to Holland to buy a mystery bag of diamonds from DeBoer's for the next year. Basically there is no complaining. You get what you get. No more. No less. A few beauties here and there, but also a couple of clinkers. And if you don't like it you are free to look for another diamond cartel. Don't bother coming back again. Having said that, I don't think that Eli would ever put up with that type of dependency on a big brother, and especially not a big brother with size 18 wingtips with steel tips.) In my view it is not appropriate for SNDK to pressure Lexar at this point. The ball is in Lexar's court and it's up to them to make an offer. If I were SNDK, however, I would make it known through legal counsel that the longer this lawsuit goes... If we get in a real bind I am sure that other options will come to the table. Perhaps we are way past the point of an amicable settlement. I think the lawsuit will "deep six" Lexar. They are small and weak. They have not commanded retail shelf space like SanDisk. They will pay dearly if they lose with a licensing fee which will price them out of the market, IMHO. Ausdauer