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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buffettology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jhg_in_kc who wrote (2540)	6/16/2000 3:20:00 PM
From: jhg_in_kc	Respond to of 4690

from RMBS thread. RMBS up 47 per cent. <<To: Don Green who wrote (44648) From: Barry Grossman Friday, June 16, 2000 2:50 PM ET Reply # of 44691 Don, I just finished listening to the cc. Thanks for the link. My reaction: Tate and Harmon sounded extremely confident that Toshiba is only the first company to come to the agreement they sought for SDRAM and DDR royalties. They are in discussions or will be in discussions with EVERY company that makes use of the Rambus patents in their products. They can't do them all all at once because their IP Division is not that large and they said that there are about 100 companies that fit into that category. Since Rambus intends for these discussions to be win-win, they explained the process this way. They plan to review their patents with each company, review the company's relevant products and explain why they believe the company requires an IP license. They expect that process to take 1-2 months and after agreement is reached on the fact that a license is required, they expect it to take another 1-2 months to come to an agreement on the specifics of the license agreement. They were asked about MU and VIA specifically but wouldn't reveal who they are talking to now because of confidentiality agreements. Did anyone notice that Rambus made the deal from 4/1/2000 to 4/1/2005? If SDRAM does require Rambus IP as the Toshiba agreement shows it does, Rambus could have demanded royalties from previous years sales BUT DIDN'T - AT LEAST WITH TOSHIBA. If any on the others needs a prod towards an agreement, it seems Rambus is willing to forego the revenue from previously manufactured SDRAM. Looks like Rambus is holding a straight flush in this poker game. Barry >>

To: jhg_in_kc who wrote (2540)	6/16/2000 3:36:00 PM
From: Michael Burry	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4690

jhg, trying to find the "next microsoft" by examining a a gambit of small companies with big potential and oversized market caps is not the goal of this thread. Your RMBS is duly noted. I'm quite liberal about including technology companies under Buffett's criteria even though he would not. Responsible investors posting a few times on why they think a company is a Buffett stock is ok. But there has to be some limit. On the value investing thread it's somewhere around 10 posts of total discussion before the topic is pretty much exhausted. Rambus has always been a high risk play. Now there's high reward. But it's still high risk, dependent on unpredictable decisions by a select few companies. It's becoming a waste of everyone's time to check on the Subjectmarks and see new Buffettology posts, but instead of new ideas it's the same old Rambus. The Rambus thread is where all future discussion from interested parties here should be directed. Thank you. Mike