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: Orion who wrote (76246)	7/27/2001 1:34:01 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi all; Inquirer reports DDR shortage: DDR now in shortage? Mike Magee, TheInquirer, July 27, 2001 NO SOONER is there a glut of DDR and SDRAM memory than there's a famine, if today's edition of Digitimes is right. Yesterday the wire reported that there was a glut of product following unenthusiastic take up of DDR by the motherboard makers in the first half of this year. Next thing we know, the wire is today claiming that there will be a shortage of DDR SDRAM, particularly from Micron, which today's issue says "has come as a surprise to many DRAM module makers". ... In other news, Digitimes claims that the i845 chipsets, to be launched any week now, will also suffer a shortfall, due to a shortage of PC-133 SDRAM. µ theinquirer.net -- Carl

To: Orion who wrote (76246)	7/28/2001 2:37:18 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

>>they do not need any capital gain on rambus.<< orion, that is naive. why did intel require payment to support rmbs contractually? intel very well may have thought rmbs was better performance wise (though i've seen conflicting reports here). they also may have felt it was economically unfeasible. it kills me how some folks in tune with "tech" totally disregard economics. unbelievable. so, rmbs gave away shares probably worth upwards of a billion bucks at their peak FOR NO REASON? the logical result of your erroneous concept is that rmbs management f* the shareholders out of a billion bucks! they did, of course, but not in this manner. ;-) it is absurdly naive to think billions of value changes hands FOR NO REASON. the fact you believe, 1. rmbs management f* its shareholders BIG and 2. that this is ok, goes a long way in explaining what motivates you to be long rmbs. you can believe absurdities, but please don't suspend economics in order to pimp a stock. it is unbecoming.