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: Ausdauer who wrote (15965)	10/24/2000 2:33:39 PM
From: JRI	Respond to of 60323

Aus- What is SNDK waiting for (today)? Get the press release out...eom

To: Ausdauer who wrote (15965)	10/24/2000 3:02:05 PM
From: Rocky Reid	Respond to of 60323

I Love Lexar's Management and kennel of pit-bull Shysters. I've said it before and I'll say it again- if SNDK had a pair as big as Lexar's SNDK would be at $300 right now. This "Fraud" allegation by Lexar was headlined and presented as to be easily mistaken as a News Item about Sandisk (a la Reuters or AP), but in fact, it is just a press release from Lexar themselves. Clever bastards. I wish Sandisk Management had the cojones Lexar does- except for the little nasty parts about Patent Infringement.

To: Ausdauer who wrote (15965)	10/24/2000 3:06:56 PM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

I do not understand why SNDK doesn't just request an injunction. Given the problems LEXR is causing them, Eli should shut them down. The argument about not wanting to hurt the market for cards doesn't hold much water with me. Jay

To: Ausdauer who wrote (15965)	10/24/2000 6:38:46 PM
From: Gary Kao	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Aus: what I can't understand is why SNDK did not seek an immediate injunction immediately after that ruling and stop cold-dead any more sales of Lexar products? Wouldn't that seem like such an obvious thing to do? thanks in advance for any thoughts you might have on this, and forgive me if you covered it previously and I was too dense to understand, Gary

To: Ausdauer who wrote (15965)	10/24/2000 8:16:12 PM
From: limtex	Respond to of 60323

Aus The Judgement is date stamped "Filed 20 October". That was last Friday. I wonder what time on Friday? Was this available and published on Monday? I wonder when SNDK learned of it. Did they only find out today? Couldn't they have issued a response earlier? All a little odd don't you think? Maybe low key is the way to deal with this. The Judge does say that he is denying one SNDK request because SNDK took two years for something and its now too late ( thats me reading it in a hurry). Whats all that about? Best regards, L