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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (72606)	5/11/2001 6:51:58 PM
From: SBHX	Respond to of 93625

wstera_02, I think SunTzu's and Ali's point was that the fact that the analysts did not even ask is a sign that they did not want their name associated with any press release from rmbs at this point. But the institutional holders closeouts will probably occur and continue on in an orderly retreat.

To: Sully- who wrote (72606)	5/11/2001 7:14:30 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Let me explain my position, and I appreciate that my judgement may be clouded by my trading position. The management has to be aware that there have been public discussions about the possibility of stop of future royalty payments or request for past refunds. The question in my mind is why would they not come out and say something along the lines of "...none of our business partners has told us they will stop royalty payments which shows they believe in our pattents/integrity of our operations, etc." Seems to me that a statement like that could calm nerves, which IMO is what the CC was really about. Unless of course, this may have already happend or they find it likely that it will happen soon. They also asked the investors to focus on the progress in the RDRAM front rather than anything else. Yet they failed to quantize that progress or the down side risk on the earnings from the SDRAM and DDR fronts. So to me this was a lame PR compaign rather than an informative CC with a positive spin. And I always react negatively to PR desguised as CC, especially when a stock is moving hard (up or down). As you say, they should have a handle on the strength of their contracts, and I had expected them to come in a lot more positive than ignore the legal actions and focus on our core RDRAM message they gave. By all means point out the holes in my stance or why RMBS will go up and when. I greatly appreciate any bull who helps me close my short position while I'm ahead. Sun (now I really have go and eat before I starve) Tzu PS There is little doubt in my mind that Rambus will survive and will be profitable. But at least for now, I find the fair price somewhere in the $4-$8 range.

To: Sully- who wrote (72606)	5/11/2001 7:16:41 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 93625

>>Doesn't make sense for RMBS Mgmt to hold a CC & intentionally hold back that info under the guise of....... 'didn't ask, we won't tell'. Gotta figure this info will become public knowledge sooner or later. Gotta figure RMBS Mgmt has a handle on the strength/weaknesses of their agreements. Holding a CC & withholding that info would not be in their best interest me thinks. Shareholder lawsuits would not help RMBS situation right now, don't you think?<< it makes perfect sense. sell, sell, sell and then let the bad news out. companies manipulate information all the time. these guys will walk away with personal gains in the $10s of millions even if rmbs goes bankrupt. btw, your reaction is precisely why they do what they do. not bad...