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: Orion who wrote (36718)	1/21/2000 5:02:00 PM
From: Glenn Norman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Yo_Orion............. Re:This lawsuit has a very positive consequence: The whole industry know Rambus right now, it is not anymore a small semi company located somewhere in California, it is a company with which you must count, because they have some interesting patents. WHAMMO!! Message 12636585 Salude ORION, I think you are RIGHT ON! - Norman.

To: Orion who wrote (36718)	1/21/2000 8:32:00 PM
From: Richard Habib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

I'd say what has changed is our window into RMBS business relations with Intel and perhaps with friendly DRAM manufacturers, ie. Samsung. The qualitative change in our view is not due to the lawsuit alone as much as the combination of the alliance, Tate's cc response regarding the alliance and the lawsuit. As you point out, the "facts" as WE know them haven't substantially changed - except that if you prefer to invest based on improbable events you can focus on the tremendous upside of a win for RMBS. But you would do well use some of the "color" we've been exposed to in the last few days, to fill in our flawed picture of events on the ground. An example, back in the fall, I think there were plenty of qualitative scenes that we were exposed to that while not facts on the ground could have led one to believe that Intel would begin to support other memory types. There seems to be a view among some on the board that the only info to take into account in investment decisions are facts on the ground. That's a limiting view IMO. An example - just as important as what Tate said in Dec cc is trying to glean the motivation behind the cc in the first place, as well as trying to glean the why of what was said. Why are the qualitative aspects of this case significant, because business relations are based as much on qualitative factors as tech. RMBS is trying to do something never done before in this industry. I think you do well to consider all the info. Rich