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 : Semi Equipment Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pcyhuang who wrote (53550)	9/2/2011 11:45:08 PM
From: Sam	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95530

Does Intel really want to get back into DRAM? And they just sold Numonyx to Micron--do they want to buy it back now? Plus, I have read that last quarter they sold the MU stock that they received in the Numonyx sale (although I haven't seen the SEC form that verifies that). They aren't listed as one of the largest holders on either Yahoo or Nasdaq. I didn't bother going to MU's web site to look for it. In any case, 450 won't be happening for at least 5 years. If it really happens at all. If Intel really does want to buy a company for that, IMHO Sandisk would be a better candidate. They would be getting Toshiba as a partner in the deal to split the costs, and would be getting access to better flash technology. And they would NOT be getting either DRAM or NOR, both of which they have already abandoned. It was a big headache for them to get rid of Numonyx, I can't imagine why they would want it back.

To: pcyhuang who wrote (53550)	9/3/2011 12:36:30 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	2 Recommendations Respond to of 95530

re INTC buying MU: Many things are possible, and unlikely things happen all the time. There might be a technology reason (that I don't understand) for such an event. I'll admit most of the regulars on this board, and perhaps you as well, know more about the technology than I do. But as a business idea, it makes little sense. INTC's gross margins were 61% in 2Q11, while MU's were 22%. INTC's margins have been slowly rising over the last 5 years, while MU's gross margins are about the same as they were 10 years ago. Why would INTC buy into a commodity business, with margins far lower than their existing franchise? It would be like Tiffanys buying a chain of pawn-shops. MU has 1.4B$ LT debt, and 2.4B$ cash. They've actually done very well this up-cycle, getting their balance sheet ready for the inevitable down-cycle. In the current down-cycle, it's unlikely MU gets desperate enough to accept a low-bid buy-out offer. And who would offer a premium, for such a lousy business? So, most likely, MU continues to be a trading stock, where the only way to make money, is being short or short-term. It's already been halved, from the cycle top, and the down-cycle is still young. I'd consider going long, when it gets below 3$.