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: Bilow who wrote (73391)	5/22/2001 1:14:26 AM
From: tinkershaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Bilow, You misunderstand the role of the judge here. The judge's role in this ruling is not to find that fraud was committed. But merely whether or not Infineon has alleged sufficient facts under the legal standard as to whether or not fraud was committed, so that a reasonable jury, if it finds evidence consistent with the allegations of the moving party, can make a legally cognizable finding of fraud. This ruling has nothing to with whether or not anything Infineon alleged was truthful or not. Those questions were for the jury to determine. And this jury did so determine that from their understanding of the law as they were instructed by the judge and of how the facts were presented to them, that Rambus had committed some form of fraud. I am not confused here. I know what the jury verdict was. What I am trying to do is put two and two together and try to determine how the jury actually reached this decision and whether or not it will stand the scrutiny of the appellate court. It is a complex issue for a very complex case. If and when I get more time, or am otherwise retained to professionally do a thorough analysis of the case, I will page by page go through all of the case files and not make the same legal misinterpretations that you did and then try to exploit them as fact. But until that time, like most people on this board, Rambus is a long-term passive investment for me. I first became interested in Rambus in 1999. By January of 2000 I made my first options purchase ever with RMBS calls (I actually traded in my QCOM profits for RMBS calls:) ---> but no, the end of 2000 was not nearly so kind:( OUCH). The propoganda in the press and on the chat boards was just too inconsistent with what was actually happening on the street and in the marketplace. Things like Samsung announcing a $4 billion plant for RDRAM, small board vendors ramping up RDRAM board production, things they couldn't afford to do unless the RDRAM roll-out was real and coming. There was also the little thing called the credibility of Intel to its vendors and suppliers to be taken into account and the drivers of the semiconductor and software industries which I will talk a little bit about below to consider. I cashed out my initial profits as they were from options. The situation we are facing today is similar, even if not nearly as explosive. RDRAM is beginning to dominate the marketplace, the predicted problems with DDR standardization and interference problems have so far proven correct. The former RDRAM is dead press releases from Taiwan have suddenly turned into RDRAM production now exceeding DDR production. Benchmarks of the new XEON are mentioning the advantages of SSE2 software (well at least one I read today). Think new software developers might not want to take advantage of this as they try to create reasons to get customers to upgrade their current software and/or buy new stuff? Think 2 ghz might not become mainstream by the end of 2002? Think that maybe SSE2 optimized high-bandwidth software might not come to dominate the market similar to what WinTel has managed to do before with previous software/hardware upgrades? Well these are the things I see from studying the drivers of the semiconductor and PC software markets. It is always possible that these drivers will change. But I believe that they have not and will not for sometime. With this in mind, as SSE2 software predominates, low-end processors reach 2 ghz, bandwidth, multi-tasking, peer-to-peer, voice recognition, gaming, the whole shebang go forward, what exactly are the memory options for vendors going forward? You have DDR and you have RDRAM. I'm not going to argue the merits between the two technologies. It has already become quite clear on the desktop which is the better choice - but others can have their say, I have seen for myself and have my own opinion. On the server things may be different, although that is far from decided. But on this basis RDRAM is a long-term winner. With Moore's law still fully functioning, a corporate purchaser is not going to buy new ghz computers that perform great today on legacy software but which gets trashed and is out-moded on future high-bandwidth SSE2 software which is around the corner. Such an IT purchaser would be out of a job quickly. Neither will consumers buy computers a year from now that will be out-dated in six months. In addition I see the digital set-top box becoming the eventual home computer as well as HDTV becoming the mainstream television devices by the middle to latter part of this decade. To me, and I could be far off base here, but it spells RDRAM. And since in a high overhead commodity industry like semidonctors, there can really only be one dominant standard, well it must be RDRAM. The risk is determining whether or not this analysis is correct, and if so, how much this is worth vs. what RMBS is currently selling for. On top of this SDRAM and DDR royalties are still far from being a thing of the past, although the Infineon trial does make this a less probable proposition than it previously appeared, but hardly a foregone conclusion. So Bilow, if you want to discuss these issues in great legal detail retain me. I'll put in the time and learn more about every single issue in this case than legal counsel for either side currently know (or thereabouts anyways), and I will not misrepresent the significants of each legal document. But until then I will discuss Rambus and bring to this discussion my own unique knowledge and skills, and stick to what is relevant in these discussions to my investment thesis in Rambus. With that I will say good night and hope that conversation on this board, absent Bilow of course, can resume its civility. I do appreciate counter-opinions from those expressing honest opinions. In fact I encourage them. Tinker