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: julian hatfield who wrote (29223)	3/2/1998 11:18:00 PM
From: MR. PANAMA (I am a PLAYER)	Respond to of 53903

Julian...you musta have worked fer the Speciale Persecutor at some time fer that SPIN....very good though ...betya MB would have loved to have said that...hahahaha just kidding ... but once again...mighty fine ... De best I have seen yet...You are now on De top of me MUSTA READ LIST...back to De binaries....

To: julian hatfield who wrote (29223)	3/3/1998 12:16:00 AM
From: Tim McCormick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Julian, you got it figured just fine. The implications are an inventory writedown. On another subject, this little gem in today's WSJ Heard On The Street column ought to give pause to the way MU mgt. releases their earnings warnings. In fact, in a speech Friday, SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt threatened a crackdown on "one increasingly worrisome form of trading on the basis of nonpublic information" -- trading based on information acquired by securities analysts and large institutional investors, but not yet made public. Tim

To: julian hatfield who wrote (29223)	3/3/1998 12:18:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 53903

julian, i wonder what it will take for the street to realize what total and utter sleaze mu management makes itself out to be.

To: julian hatfield who wrote (29223)	3/3/1998 12:43:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 53903

julian, here is the goods... exchange2000.com the bottom line is this. mu doesn't want to spend money on testing equipment when it doesn't make sense to test parts when you refuse to sell them. inventories should skyrocket. they've used and abused muei too badly already. they are praying for short term survival.

To: julian hatfield who wrote (29223)	3/3/1998 8:51:00 AM
From: mike iles	Respond to of 53903

Julian, You're right on. If MU doesn't increase unit output, their cost per chip doesn't just stabilize it increases. This is because their total operating costs are gradually increasing quarter-to-quarter ... last 5 quarters costs have progressed from $343M to $366M to $356M (don't know what happened here) to $372M and $415M last quarter (Skeeter says they will go up about another $30M this quarter due to higher D&A ... also there's higher head-count). In the face of falling prices, the only thing that has saved their bacon is big increases in unit output. If that stopped ... ouch!! While it's hard to know exactly what the tester pushout means (maybe it was just for 64 Mbit and they now think crossover will be delayed?), I don't see any way that it can be viewed positively for MU. regards, Mike