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 : Applied Magnetics Corp -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Adams who wrote (11097)	12/20/1997 4:56:00 PM
From: Jonathan Bird	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12298

Also, APM is reviewing it's plans, and may not need to expend 170 million given the strategy changes. One of the links Don posted recently reiterated that you use the same equipment to produce MR/GMR heads as TFI, but need to add a few pieces here and there for some additional steps. I'm gettting the impression that APM is in a spend or die situation. They have some catchup to do. And 170 million doesn't sound like "a few pieces here and there". The future of the company depends on these improvements. It seems to me they will take any steps necessary to complete them. Jon Bird

To: Mark Adams who wrote (11097)	12/20/1997 7:12:00 PM
From: Stitch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12298

Mark; re: transition from TFI to MR you wrote: <One of the links Don posted recently reiterated that you use the same equipment to produce MR/GMR heads as TFI, but need to add a few pieces here and there for some additional steps.> This seems to trivialize the cap ex required to shift from TFI to MR/GMR. However, in a recent speech Bob Scranton of IBM specifically noted that the transition to MR from TFI was far greater , in all respects, then from MR to GMR. Could you refresh me on the link you mentioned? Best, Stitch