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: Sridhar Srinivasan who wrote (29129)	3/1/1998 1:57:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

>>The market collectively understands the fundamentals better than the few here.<< let's see. they didn't at $60. they didn't at $55 (twice). they didn't at $50 (twice). they didn't at $45 (twice). they didn't at $40 (twice). and now it looks like they didn't at $35 (thrice). but now they do. ok. at some point you will be right. but then again, even a broken clock is right twice a day ;-) even so, you will be right when you say that in the teens. just keep saying it, though. you will be right eventually ;-) >>such as the one about micron being the low cost producer<< ok. i believe everyone agrees that mu is a low cost producer. however, the low cost producer is rank speculation fed by the self serving dolts leading mu - you know, the ones that said the koreans may (think about the legal implication of their terminology ;-) be out of inventory during the slowest demand season of the year. sure, mu is competitive on costs. however, buying a company and valuing it in the stratosphere based upon costs alone is ridiculous. it is one positive in a cut throat industry - that, btw, doesn't mean a whole bunch when you are losing money. i would rather have $10 billion in resources and lose $350 million a year than lose $280 million and have $1 billion in resources. there i go, using third grade math again. amazing that it is so hard to comprehend. well, maybe we'll get some graduates this year ;-)

To: Sridhar Srinivasan who wrote (29129)	3/1/1998 2:18:00 AM
From: TREND1	Respond to of 53903

SS You wrote <<The market collectively understands the fundamentals better than the few here. >> SS I agree with the above 100% ! A stock like MU can only go UP or DOWN. And the more words I read about MU, the more I realize that MU can go only UP or DOWN (g) Larry Dudash

To: Sridhar Srinivasan who wrote (29129)	3/1/1998 1:59:00 PM
From: Richard Russell	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 53903

>>The market collectively understands the fundamentals better than the few here. << IMO that statement is one of the most assinine you have posted. Its been shown over and over again that the theory of an efficient market is completely false. The market does not "understand" anything. It reacts and responds to host of many factors and variables, fundamental, technical, psychological, political. Forces with different agendas are constantly working and fear and greed reign supreme. To suggest that the "market" is somehow an all knowing Poobah that has an understanding of fundamentals makes what little credibility you have on these boards, evaporate. >>The fact just happens to be that the fringe elements that run rampant here (bears, largely) will claim that all the facts that you have underscored are either irrelevant for their FA or not acceptable (such as the one about micron being the low cost producer). << The facts highlighted are what I believe the bears have been saying all along. If there is anything that mu or any other competitor is doing to reduce cost and increase efficiency of production then those methods will be adopted by all thereby neutralizing the advantage. If mu was the low cost producer others will imitate them and then everyone is equally low. All are always looking for some advantage but when that advantage is instituted it will not go on indefinetly for just that one company. Because of your biased perspective I don't think you understand that the underscored only underscore more bad news for mu. Everyones going to be more efficient and the capacity cutbacks will not stop the glut anytime soon. RR