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: TREND1 who wrote (12818)	7/11/2000 10:03:18 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Larry, While it is certainly true that anything can happen in a trial (think of a certain orange juice), it is unlikely that Lexar will prevail. Many of Sandisk's patents have already been tested in court against more powerful companies than Lexar (Samsung). Lexar tried very hard to buy time so that they could get their IPO out before a ruling came down, so that they could pay the judgement, but no luck for them. A company with $29m in revenue and $14m in losses--without paying the royalties that other competitors in the sector are paying--tends to have bad luck. Your comment about MSFT was a little gratuitous. I say this respectfully. But, IMO, one case has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Best wishes, Sam

To: TREND1 who wrote (12818)	7/11/2000 10:25:43 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Larry, re: The Microsoft Trial I have covered SanDisk's patent defense history in my investment case and don't feel compelled to repeat it here as I have now linked it innumerable times of late (NOTE: done for the benefit of new investors looking for a starting point for their d.d. files and because SI has no way of referring to old links that is convenient). There is no way to interpret Lexar Media's SEC filing in any other way than extremely cautionary. Pinning their hopes on the outcome of a patent nullification trial against an established industry leader seems unjustifiably risky for reasons I have described. Portions of the '987 patent in question reportedly date back to the late 1980's. The '987 patent itself was awarded in 1997. To date it has been "unchallenged". How defensible are the CF assembly patents? That remains to be seen. Ask yourself though, have you ever attempted to purchase Toshiba, Hitachi or Samsung CompactFlash cards in the USA? P.S. Nice to know you were an "honest witness". I guess the other witnesses aren't required to take an oath or cross their fingers behind their back. Ausdauer