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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JCnieuwenj who wrote (59941)	2/24/2016 1:41:15 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 60323

JC -- You raise a good point concerning whether SanDisk 48-layer 3D will be less costly or better performing than the 48-layer chips that Samsung says it is now making. In the past, however, Samsung has not done all that well with its 3D solutions. Samsung was the first to offer 3D on a 32-layer chip, probably at a net loss due to poor yield. SanDisk did not commercialize its 48-layer 3D until it was able to obtain satisfactory yield and produce a chip that would meet all the speed and reliability requirements of customers. SanDisk has a pretty good record on this point, except for its one big error of execution of embedded chips to meet Apple iPhone specifications. I believe that SanDisk retains a competitive advantage in producing all its NAND flash chips, whether MLC, TLC, or 3D, because of the favorable exchange rate that makes products built in Japan very competitive with those built in Korea. If the yen-dollar rate had remained near 78 to the dollar, instead of its current approximate 117 to the dollar, then there would be little question that SanDisk chips would have a tough time competing on world markets. Finally, as I've mentioned before, I think SanDisk has enough patents and enough royalty based revenues to remain not only competitive but the low cost producer for at least three or four more years, if not more. Many of those who are interested in SanDisk believe its technology is rapidly being outmoded by both Samsung and Intel. Samsung, as I've suggested above, may have cutting edge technology, but its costs are probably not lower than SanDisk's. Intel, judging by its failed efforts to make competitive processor and modem chips for cell phones and tablets, tends to make claims beyond its capabilities. They claim to have an unbeatable solution in non-volatile memory for enterprise servers. I'm waiting for the results. Art