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 (77672)	8/17/2001 10:21:02 PM
From: Steve Lee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Still diggin that hole Bilow? 1) You said: What I said was that Samsung was cutting their RDRAM production as a percentage of total bits produced My response: Wrong. You said (I quote) "Hi all; <font color=red>Samsung cuts RDRAM, raises DDR production, corrected figures (LOL!!!)" 2) You said: What I said was that Samsung had cut their percentage RDRAM production. My response: Wrong again. See 1) above 3) You said: What the figures from Samsung show is that their RDRAM production, as a percentage of their total DRAM production (as measured in bits), is decreasing between July and August My response: Wrong again. They show the estimates from Samsung of what the situation will be for the whole of the year. They are not snapshots of July and Aug production, rather estimates made in those months. And there is no indication from Samsung as to whether the figures are dollars or bits. 4) You said You're the master of misquoting by leaving out parts of quotes, aren't you? I already noted that I had an incorrect figure in that post Wrong. That title goes to you. You told me I was misquoting the ExtremeTech article. I asked you how and you have changed the subject to me misquoting your post. I accept the error in your post was a typo. and I know that the 17-10% is a typo on Samsung's part that should read 17-20% (I checked you see). When asking you about the misquote, I didn't even bring up the 10%/20% matter. This is you wriggling out of answering how I misquoted the ExtremeTech article. Any chance of an answer on that point by the way? 5) You said: I could go look for total bit figures from Samsung, and verify this, but frankly, I don't care. It doesn't matter. RDRAM isn't ramping any more. That's all that matters My response: Wrong. You care a lot. Go on, get those figures. I call your bluff. You care enough to post here all day and night. And whats this about RDRAM not ramping? What was this week's press release on the new RDRAM products from amsung all about? 6) You said: If you were intelligent, you would be coming up with a positive spin for Rambus My response: Wrong. I have no interest in positive spin for Rambus. I quite readily admit that my expectations for the companies and stock's performance were way higher than how things have turned out. But I got out in March 2000 with some nice profits from Mar 2000 calls (at a time I was posting all my trades on SI). I later lost some change on RMBS stock position. No qualms in admitting mistakes. My interest in the topic now relates to holding MU puts. I think MU is going to make vast losses, perhaps losing all its book value over the next few years. But if they make more than I reckon because DDR does better than I assume, then my outs might be in trouble. So I want to follow the RDRAM/DDR saga. If DDR is going to make a lot of money for MU, I do not intend to spin it, I intend to sell the puts. I am interested in making money and finding facts. Facts come from industry players, not journalists. You try to hold yourself up as a DRAM guru, but when your hypotheses are scrutinised in detail, they dont stand up and you resort to lies and insults. I will continue to research the claims you make, and argue the point with you until you reach the point where you have no arguments left and hit tantrum. The tantrum point is the acid test of the validity of your claims. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA