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 (17700)	12/27/2000 5:53:49 PM
From: limtex	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

Aus - The earnings will not be pivotal to SNDK longs as by definition longs are longs and most of us have been around to qualify. We are all concerned becasue the stock price is so low. That is entirely due to the downgrade having provided an excellent opportunity for some shorts and hedge funds to make some moeny on the SNDK longs. PLs don't forget onyl a few days earlier SNDK was at $68 having been added to an S&P index and catching the shorts off guard and probably some hedge funds too. We should have expected they would pull something to get some money back and that they wouldn't wait long. We should also remember that SNDK was $68 a few days ago in the middle of the greatest stcok market crash in history. I'm not refering to last March or last December. I am refering to about ten days ago! The current drop is artificial. Still the economy will pick up later next year which is fine becuse i'm pretty sure that SNDK does more than 50% of its business in the 2nd half of the year. We should also remember that the market cap is less than $1bn and SNDK is therefore 'tiny' in corporate terms. We should also remember what longs are all about although it has been very difficult to do so during the last nine months. We should also remember that Eli promised to build a major company and SNDK has a number of very big projects on right now which will make it a major producer with control of its own production as its markets expand exponentially. Seems like a good plan to me. It is also clear that there is profesisional short selling going on. It feels like it. The stock wants to advance but every time it makes a move it is met with selling. The funds clearly aren't buying the stock and that is the result of the downgrade. After nine months of the worst bear market in history my guess is that most of the waek hands have got out and who is left actually likes SNDK as an investment ( rare as that might be today). So who is keeping up the selling? Professionals. So what. they will eventually go away for a time and the stock will rise. I know how one feels like negative posting out of frustration from time to time but SNDK is going to make it. Best regards, L

To: Ausdauer who wrote (17700)	12/27/2000 6:11:13 PM
From: Andre Williamson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Aus and thread - Correct me if I'm mistaken, but Eli has repeatedly said that the market for high density flash will be capacity constrained for a long time. Today's production was sold out probably 2-3 quarters ago, and no announcements have been made suggesting anything has changed. One report that was published a few months back talked about high density flash capacity constraints through at least 2004. My conclusion, therefore, and supported by what our 'channel checks' have repeatedly confirmed, is that there continues to be a shortage. Since SanDisk books revenues when the final customer buys them, I expect Q4 sales to vastly exceed Q3 sales. I have seen nothing to support anything other than a revenue and earnings blowout for Q4. Just my 2c. OT, some of the AG theories are interesting and all, but I submit (as have others) that the NAZ valuation and even SNDK's current market value should not be viewed by any responsible investor as anything other than par for the course. I have virtually no doubt that SanDisk will continue to plow ahead, and this will be reflected in the stock price, probably sooner (like within 2 months) rather than later IMO. My prediction, which probably isn't worth much more than the electrons transmitting it, is that SanDisk's next earnings report will be stellar, and all the myopic WS types will suddenly (perhaps temporarily) 'get it,' and we'll start getting more calls of 'SanDisk is different, undervalued, it isn't commodity memory, but rather at the heart of the mobile device boom.' I think SanDisk is a triple within the year from here. Having said that, could shorts drive it to $15 on the back of more ignorant evaluations? Perhaps. But long-term, we've got much better upside than down from here. Again, IMO. Andre

To: Ausdauer who wrote (17700)	12/28/2000 10:16:22 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 60323

Aus, some people obviously believe that there will be an overcapacity for production of flash memory units in a year or even less. One reason this notion may be completely wrong is the number of new applications for flash memory. Remember when we were all concerned mainly about whether the number of camera manufacturers using CF was greater than, and how much greater than SmartMedia? That was in the good old days a couple of years ago, before MP3, before data storage for hand held computers, and before the advent of high capacity memory units capable of holding an entire full length movie. The high capacity units are just beginning to arrive, but meanwhile, is it possible that we've forgotten that personal health card, designed with Kaneb Services, to be used by all military personnel? The health card, which would store all pertinent health records for a person, seems to me to be the future killer application. Consider the advantages: A rugged, virtually indestructable record that cannot be examined without the direct approval of the patient. Reliability and security in one little package. Easy to read in any standard computer equipped with the appropriate card reader. Humongous cost savings over current storage of health records by insurers, medical facilities, etc. I understand the argument you make in relation to AOL, but I think the real reason why the flat rate made AOL successful was not the additional customers that initially overwhelmed the service but the additional ADVERTISING REVENUES made possible as a result. This was also a watershed in AOL policy, where content took second priority to advertising revenue. Art