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 : IDTI - an IC Play on Growth Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hippieslayer who wrote (7000)	2/25/1998 9:06:00 AM
From: Hippieslayer	Respond to of 11555

ALTR was upgraded today for anyone who is interested.

To: Hippieslayer who wrote (7000)	2/25/1998 11:29:00 AM
From: Rob S.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11555

My guess is that they have up to a year to make a deal because it will take about that long for them to be producing at the 500k-750k C6 parts per quarter rate. At that rate they would produce only 2%-3% of overall market demand and only 1%-2% of dollar volume. Intel has, in the past, entered lawsuits against rivals before they had significant amounts of production. That situation may well have changed. Intel lost the costly (in terms of Intel management focus more than money) lawsuits with AMD and Cyrix so they may not be nearly as eager to enter into a fray with IDTI. Still, IDTI has said that a major reason they have some immunity now is because they aren't producing enough parts to worry Intel. Just when that line will be crossed is only a guess. I think that IDTI has posibly more to gain from a strategic standpoint than just from a protection standpoint. Demand for low cost, market segmented, & highly integrated SOC uPs will grow tremendously over the next few years, the strains on little IDTI may grow to be too much. With huge new market opportunities comes huge new needs for manufacturing capacity and strategic relationships in the computer, communications, and consumer electronics markets. So the purpose of using an Intel licensed fab is more than protection against Intel. They would gain an alternate supply of parts - something that would warm up the major OEMs to doing business. They would gain needed in-place capacity and the use of experienced personel, something that they can continue to grow, but more quickly. And they would gain possible access to needed technology; 1] copper metal for reduced size, lower power, very high speed uPs. 2] very low voltage technology - something IDTI needs now. 3] ability to produce PII clone slot 1 and slot 2 uP modules if they want to pursue in-your-face competition against Intel's current high-end products and counter the shift toward PII. Why discuss the potential for a lawsuit? Because its better to discuss it and clear the air than to wait for some surprise that hits the stock price. If this is nothing, IDTI hasn't clarrified that to investors. Otherwise, its a potential problem for holders of IDTI stock. If people get upset because a thorney issue has been brought up, then the onus is on them to dispel the discussion with clear reasoning or statements from IDTI. It's also important to keep this in context with the many opportunities that IDTI has in front of it. It's one potential obstacal but it's not a "show stopper". Yes, "only the paranoid survive" and only aware (paranoid?) investors have the best chance to make money.