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: Zeev Hed who wrote (16214)	10/29/2000 9:56:11 AM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

how do we explain the increase of AR by $50 MM in the last quarter when product revenues increased by only $30 MM? As a follow up to my last post, maybe it's because of all of the capacity that came on line in the second half of the quarter: Availability of Flash memory from the three fabs at UMC and from our partnership with Toshiba improved significantly in the second half of the quarter. biz.yahoo.com An extra large OEM shipment probably went out in the last half of the quarter. I am sending an email to IR. Hopefully, we will get this answered quickly.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (16214)	10/29/2000 11:14:53 AM
From: limtex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Zeev - This help? Goodness gracious whatever next. As if we didn't have enough else to worry about what with SOX, VIX, the biggest market collapse in history etc now a series of correspondence putting some really unpleasant questions. Still even though there was a good conference call and every analysts had a go if he wanted questions of this type are posted on a serious bulletin board. Well I'm not privy to any more information than anyone here but I have looked at the 10Qs for the last few qtrs and the 10K. 1. AR/Product sales was running approx .75 until Q1 00 when it climbed to .81. 2. For Q2 00 AR/Product Sales DROPPED to .68. 3. The figures just announced show AR/Product Sales of .87. SO the change has been an increase of 5 days over the number that it was running in Q1. Now I don't have the precise answer as to why there was an increase of 5 days in the collection %age and I notice that you and other posters are confused and perplexed and can't imagine how this could have happened. Well one possible explanation is that product revenues in September were higher than product revenues in July or August. Now I don't know whether this actually happened but it would reconcile with the lower pattern in the Q2 numbers and if retailers were for instance going to try to reduce the time that they had inventory onthe shelf then that would also be consistent. I hope this goes some way to providing some explanations for the OTT comments and worries of some of our old hands. Best regards, L