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: mike iles who wrote (25776)	12/18/1997 10:41:00 AM
From: Tim McCormick	Respond to of 53903

MU now has 70,000 shs. offerred at 24 5/16. Whew! Tim

To: mike iles who wrote (25776)	12/18/1997 11:01:00 AM
From: TREND1	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 53903

Mike 16 Meg SDRAM $4.50 Larry Dudash PS: back from the coffe shop.

To: mike iles who wrote (25776)	12/18/1997 12:20:00 PM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 53903

Mike: Having read the Goldman commentary, it is obvious that a few phone calls were made during the last few days.....I can just hear it ....(one side only) - "Goldman?, we're unhappy as blazes with you. First you sell us a bunch of MU junk bonds that allow these bandits to defer the interest payments for a couple of years, then you take a powder before the ink on the fees cheque is dry. Within nanoseconds of that purchase, their supposed earnings fall like an aerodynamic brick, and the bids make like the Sahara. We're thinking of suing." - "Don't tell me that we should have read the fine print, ......most of my staff can't add simple numbers, never mind read, besides which, we relied on your representations". I also want to remind you that we bought a bunch of that private placement, toilet-wipe MUEI paper which immediately began to sublimate before we could put it into our accounts. Our lawyers tell us this will be a slam-dunk" - "What do you mean, we can't hold you responsible, as you've not even covered the stock for several months.....our lawyers say it will look like a pump and dump in court and that you'll be roasted" - "Ok, you'll resume coverage with a positive bias to let us bleed it out.....a small help I agree, but you owe us big time on this turkey." Putting aside the whimsical editorial license, this one stinks. The content of the piece says it all "our recommendation is based on value relative to longer term earnings potential".....translation - currently it's ability to produce anything but losses is impossible, so lets pull something out of the air waaaaaaaaaay out there. "Our estimate is $1.50 for financial 1999"..... translation - working the problem backwards, what earnings number do we need to justify some sort of mild bounce? "We are not calling for an immediate end to pricing pressure, as producer inventory still needs to be worked down"....translation - they believed the old inventories are being worked off blarney last year, maybe it will work again this year. "Yet the severity of the current downturn will sow the seeds of an eventual recovery in mid to late 1998".....translation - always sell them hope. ""lower (dram) prices will lead to increases in dram-per-PC (useage).....translation - I hope none of the readers actually know that per PC dram useage is slipping. "A removal of older dram capacity that is currently not covering variable costs".....translation - I pray that the readers have no knowledge of the number of new fabs that have just or are about to come on stream. "We think we are likely early in our investment theory"......translation - nothing like a bit of understatement to CYA. and finally,....."We are not trying to call an imminent bottom in dram pricing, rather we are looking towards a set of economic factors that could drive a longer term sustained upturn in the sector, and we think that the company is well positioned to benefit".....translation - we can see nothing positive on the horizon, but what the heck, the company is in the memory business, and maybe the industry itself will survive, so let's be a little bit positive about the future....besides which, WE DON'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC IN ANY WAY. Probably the worst piece of drivel passing for research that I have witnessed in many years. It is pure and simple baloney. Not that it doesn't play to our desires, as there is nothing I'd rather see than a nice rally in this fluff to provide better shorting prices. Best, Earlie