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: KeepItSimple who wrote (37200)	2/15/2000 6:17:00 PM
From: James Fulop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

>>Interestingly, some puts i bought this morning actually INCREASED in value by about 20 percent even though the stock closed higher than the point at which i bought the puts. In other words, everyone knows it is a short squeeze that will end, pretty soon.<< I'm not an options player, so I could be way off here, but it occurs to me that what you say could be possible. Or maybe the value of the put increased as the implied volatility component increased by far over the implied decrease in the underlying security price component... Not sure if that makes sense, but would enjoy reading yours and others opinions on this... Thanks in advance..

To: KeepItSimple who wrote (37200)	2/15/2000 8:45:00 PM
From: rogermci®	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Very perceptive, keepitsimple. This was nothing more then another squeeze orchestrated by the CNBC hype at the 140 level around 2 pm. They must have mentioned it 10 times in the last 2 hours. The move from 140 to 172 was daytraders forcing shorts to box or cover their positions. Ain't no way this is worth twice what it was 4 days ago. I sold shares I didn't even own at 153 average. roger

To: KeepItSimple who wrote (37200)	2/16/2000 12:17:00 AM
From: Boplicity	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

You got it. What the hell changed? Nothing. RDRAMS are still costly all you have to look at is the fact they aren't being used in servers the mother of all places where ram is used in massive amounts. Watch the CEO come out and say that the stock is ahead of itself, shoot it dead again. They dram manufacturer are not going to let this happen, even INTC see that by playing it both ways. I see INTC including the other DDR slot as very damaging. What is the big deal about DELL too, they have had them RDAMS for sometime, sure they where the slower ones. Also, with intensive graphic need being taken care of more and more at the card level and not so CPU depended, why do I need to have the more costly RDAMS? WHY? Greg--Certified hater of RMBS, If I owned it I would still hate it but I would be happy about it. <gg>