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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (24540)	11/26/1997 11:31:00 AM
From: Tim McCormick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Thomas, I agree with your sentiment, but not your conclusion> "You've got a situation where a U.S. company and its management could have made every correct decision possible (for the sake of argument, let's assume they did) and the end result is that they end up getting crunched because most of the other players are totally clueless." MU could have decided to exit the DRAM biz at the last mkt. peak. Though drastic, that was the proper strategic decision for shareholders. The SEA producers enter the chip business with DRAM because it is the easiest to make. Or, low barrier to entry. There long-term strategy is to upgrade to proprietary business. This was no secret two years ago. So, you see the competition bringing on capacity based on non-economic factors and you still blow more than your cash flow to play with them in the next cycle. Sounds like cement-head thinking to me. Tim

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (24540)	11/26/1997 12:08:00 PM
From: ratan lal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Tom << Sorry, but companies that screw-up deserve to fail without the safety net of a government/banking "winky, winky" >> Please get my refund for all money govt spent to bail out the banking industry, specially since now these banks are making a killing. << but give the guy credit for going on CNBC and being pretty darn forthright about what the actions of foreign players are doing to MU - obviously they are hurting it.>> I was amazed to hear his words. Previous posts have suggested that he puts a positive spin on his business. Was he being honest to be honest or was he targeting his comments to IMF and commerce dept.?? << And speaking as a "manager" and not a "trader", I share his frustration. >> I agree. But as we all know life's a bitch (and then you die). I have had my share as I am sure others have. ratan

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (24540)	11/26/1997 3:24:00 PM
From: mike iles	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Tom, Okay, I agree MU has to compete, uh rephrase that, chooses to compete against a culture where politicians, businessmen and bankers operate in a tightly intertwined way ... you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. More so than in the U.S., although I'm sure Mr. Simplot has his friends in Washington. Is this unfair? Don't think so ... it means they're more aggressive and built way more fabs back in the salad days than would have happened in a less incestuous, more free enterprise culture. They took bigger risks and now they're getting their heads handed to them. I think you got to separate this from the issue of bailing them out. Certainly, from MU's POV it's unfair to bail them out. I agree ... so let'em tank. But then people will argue bigger issues. With world trade so interconnected, it actually benefits the rest of the world, U.S. included, to help them out. That's a different argument and if the IMF goes that route it is unfair to MU ... agreed. But MU's goose is cooked for the next, how long? 2-3 quarters, because supply is overwhelming demand. And it could get worse with the ramp of 64 Mbit parts. That's the external environment. Where I part company with you is the assumption that Steve A. et al are good guys, they've done everything right and the fact that they're in the hole is due to forces outside their control ... it just ain't true: 1) why don't they have a stronger balance sheet? This was a $90 stock a couple of years ago, a $60 stock a few months ago ... why haven't they raised substantial equity? It's not for lack of opportunity. 2) how come they have a production bottleneck in testing SDRAM? 3) why will their runrate for 64 Mbit be a miserly 1 million/month exiting this year? Samsung's is 5X that and NEC is 3.5X. MU's like the grasshopper or whatever it was, having fun all summer and now it's winter and hey there ain't no food in the larder. 4) how come their much-vaunted diversification efforts have led to zip so far. BTW, Appleton's closing remark was that the RF products would begin to contribute significantly to earnings in the second half of this fiscal year ... don't hold your breath! Bipin had a really interesting post way back which explained why MU's culture made this a remote possibility. The Koreans aren't responsible for these failures. Anyway, what I think this means, Appleton's press conference, is that they really are in a big hole, and DavidG I guarantee you (for what that's worth) they are losing money today ... if things continue like this they will lose a lot more. 'Steve A. .... I coulda been a contenduh' regards, Mike

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (24540)	11/30/1997 2:02:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 53903

>>And speaking as a "manager" and not a "trader", I share his frustration.<< tom, don't even think for a minute that simpleton was being genuine. the dude's a self serving dork, imho. keep in mind the context. koreans hold back dram and price goes up. mu execs say the stupidest sh*t, yes, there is plenty of that in utah contrary to current beliefs, to pimp their price up and raise $500 million at outrageous stock valuations due to this increase in price CAUSED BY THE HOLDBACKS. now, anybody in economics knows that what gets held back must get unleashed and that the end result is, more often than not, worse than if the hold back never occurred. WELCOME, MU, TO THE END RESULT. well, we're now on the other side of that curve, the same curve that mu mercilessly pimped and pumped and, in some cases, dumped (stock) and now they cry "woe is me?" HELLO?!?!?! well, instead of puckering up to the imf, they need to pucker up to my backside. they have zero credibility.