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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Green who wrote (35203)	11/25/1999 1:38:00 AM
From: richard surckla	Respond to of 93625

Anybody know what happened to Yo_Glenn Norman? I miss his posts. Funny guy.

To: Don Green who wrote (35203)	11/25/1999 2:05:00 AM
From: John Stichnoth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi, Don. Has the Prophet gone to bed? Try these: > 1. RMBS is a pure IPR which will licenses its technology to each of the key RAM manufacturers. >> SO! The point is that QCOM and RMBS both enhance the barriers to entry by their IPR protection. (The question was on the similarities of the two companies) > 2. INTC is committed to RMBS, as evidenced by its financial stake in the company, its roadmap going forward, and the need to drive consumers towards faster CPUs. >> Even Intel can make a mistake, the market decides! But, the market can only decide among options that are actually for sale. A flaw in Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is the value chain inherent in tech products. If there are so many companies depending on a standard being established, that standard will be established. And, that will happen even if the proposed standard is inferior to other options. The best example of this is Microsoft. > 3. DELL, the only really important PC company, has indicated that it intends to be 50% RDRAM by mid-2000. The other top boxmakers are also all producing RDRAM-based computers. >> So they can't change their mind assuming consumers and business decide to tighten their belts and go the cheaper route! They can change their minds, but there are substantial switching costs implied in doing so. Anything close will go to RDRAM. > 4. RDRAM scales to much faster speeds than DDR, and although RDRAM may initially be more expensive than conventional RAM, the price differential will dissipate as the product ramps up. Additionally, RDRAM should be heavily entrenched by the time DDR is even fully available for PCs. >> IMHO more computer buyers are more cost bias than they are speed bias. Until that just got to have that extra horsepower for that "UNKNOWN Killer App". But, we've seen in the past a preference for the high end machines, even in the face of low utility. This is an issue that rational people can reasonably disagree on, I'd say, since the future apps, economic conditions and buying preferences are unknown. > 5. RMBS has yet to even try to market its product through any form of advertising. Just wait and see once the product is available in quantities and they do so. >> You are assuming anyone beyond a rich computer nerd really cares. A dangerous assumption IMHO. Americans IMHO generally go for cost over quality. That's not my observation. They go for value. The question is whether they will perceive value in RDRAM-based systems. They will if they outperform the competition. And, dont forget the "mine is bigger than yours" factor. (There's a lot of pressure in the workplace to provide valued employees with the "best" machine, for morale. > 6. Streaming media and broadband will drive the need for faster RAM, just as RDRAM is reaching critical price points. >> Yes, I agree someday, but can only Rambus do the job and will they Rambus survive that long? I suppose that that is why the stock's not already priced at $300. There is uncertainty here. >> #7. Is all potential not FACT, all assuming they ever become more than a niche company a.k.a Iomega!!!! Oops! That's kind of like my response to #6, I think. Risk! Other points: 1. Part of Iomega's problem was quality control. A lot of their stuff just didn't work when you brought it home. (That happened to me with two different products). 2. Iomega never established themselves or any of their products as a standard. 3. Iomega never established an alliance with an Intel. BTW--I am no longer a rambus star-gazer. The whole risk thing has become much more important, with delays in moving the product and the appearance of contenders. Very real issues that make present price levels about right, imo. Of course that will change quickly--up or down--with significant technical or sales developments. Best, JS Ps--On unclewest. I must have missed the point somewhere, then. Never mind. :o)