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: Dave Gore who wrote (18481)	1/24/2001 6:26:17 PM
From: Cooters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

Dave, You are correct, they said ASP's INCREASED from Q3 to Q4, thus the EPS number on light revenues. IMHO, this was the result of weak OEM sales, which carry lower margins vs. retail. I was numb through most of the CC after reading the dismal guidance in the press release, so I will be of no use in documenting the CC. In fact, I am going to the bar. See everyone tomorrow. Cooters

To: Dave Gore who wrote (18481)	1/24/2001 6:39:39 PM
From: orkrious	Respond to of 60323

Dave, I think royalties were higher than expected, helped by Lexar. Cooters, I wonder if we'll be at the same bar? Jay

To: Dave Gore who wrote (18481)	1/24/2001 6:40:45 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

David, I think the loss of OEM sales was partially offset by retail sales. We tracked retail sales unofficially here on this site during the holiday and clearly the increase in retail Q-over-Q prevented a major earnings disappointment. I still am dumbfounded how they beat the EPS estimates despite the flat top-line growth. I still need to listen to the c.c. Finally, it would appear that Merrill Lynch actually got it right. I respect the analyst for his accurate prediction, but am still upset that a single institution can sway the stock price so profoundly. Aus

To: Dave Gore who wrote (18481)	1/24/2001 6:40:45 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 60323

David, I think the loss of OEM sales was partially offset by retail sales. We tracked retail sales unofficially here on this site during the holiday and clearly the increase in retail Q-over-Q prevented a major earnings disappointment. I still am dumbfounded how they beat the EPS estimates despite the flat top-line growth. I still need to listen to the c.c. Finally, it would appear that Merrill Lynch actually got it right. I respect the analyst for his accurate prediction, but am still upset that a single institution can sway the stock price so profoundly. Aus

To: Dave Gore who wrote (18481)	1/24/2001 8:50:56 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

There are about $4.4 MM extra royaltiues (relative to last quarter) 5.5 cents per share differential. There is another additional 1.5 MM improvement due to better margins, but that is "cancelled" out by higher overhead. I am not sure why everyone is surprised here. At the end of the last quarter we ad a big argument here about SNDK DSO which increased markedly, and it was then suggested that this alone will impact this quarter, simply because such increase on DSO is often a sign of "stuffing the channels", either literally, or by shipping a lot in the last two weeks of the quarter to nmake the quarter. This coupled with a less than stellar Christmas season, which affected many companies relying on that season, yielded these results. Zeev