SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Disk Drive Sector Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mark Oliver who wrote (2861)3/16/1998 11:19:00 PM
From: LK2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9256
 
Possible trouble spots in tomorrow's market (MU, MUEI, etc.)
Looks like Sam was right, the bad news isn't over yet.
cbs.marketwatch.com

Micron Tech misses profit target

By Binti T. Harvey, CBS MarketWatch
Mon Mar 16 18:10:03 1998


Micron Technology (MU) shares are prepared to topple Tuesday after
the memory chip maker posted a wider-than-expected second-quarter
loss of 41 cents a share. The Street's consensus forecast was a loss of 17
cents a share. Excluding an 18-cent gain for the sale of one of its
businesses, the loss comes to 23 cents a share vs. a year-ago profit of 68
cents. Revenue at the Boise, Idaho, company decreased to $755.4 million
from $876.2 million in the second-quarter of 1997. Micron said its
memory chip sales plunged to $283 million from $440 million in the first
quarter of 1998, plagued by "dumping" by its Asian competitors. Shares
closed up 3/4 at 33 3/4 ahead of the report.

Micron Electronics (MUEI), a subsidiary of Micron Technology, also
reported second-quarter results after the market closed. The direct-sales
computer manufacturer posted a profit of 26 cents a share, including a
loss from its PC operations and a gain on the sale of its custom
manufacturing services business. Analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment
Research expected a loss of 5 cents a share. Micron didn't respond to
requests for per-share figures excluding extraordinary items. Sales fell 3
percent from year-ago levels to $494.8 million. Ahead of the report, the
stock closed up 1/16 at 11 13/16 ahead of the report.

Encad Inc. (ENCD) shares could dip Tuesday after the company warned
it will miss first-quarter views by a landslide. The printer manufacturer
expects to break even or report a loss in its first quarter, while the Street
was expecting a profit of 33 cents a share. Encad forecast a significant
decline in first-quarter revenue from year-ago levels, citing
lower-than-expected sales and margin pressure. Furthermore, the
company sees fiscal 1998 results falling below 1997 levels. Encad expects
to return to profitability in the second quarter, with improvement in the
second half of the year.

Chip-equipment manufacturer Electro Scientific Industries Inc. (ESIO)
reported third-quarter results below expectations. The company posted a
profit of 65 cents a share, excluding merger charges, compared to 55
cents a year ago. Analysts' consensus view was 68 cents a share. Sales
increased to $57.6 million from $45.8 million in the third quarter of 1997.
Shares closed up 2 1/2 at 37 1/2.

Shares of Iomega Corp. (IOM) got an 18 percent haircut after the data
storage product manufacturer warned it will report a first-quarter loss.
Iomega expects to lose between $10 million and $25 million and record a
negative cash flow. The First Call consensus estimate for the quarter was
a profit of 9 cents a share. Iomega cited lower-than-expected sales, with
particular weakness in international markets. Iomega also expects
inventory to rise further in the first quarter. Iomega shares closed down 1
1/2 at 7 1/8.

Compaq Computer Corp. (CPQ) edged higher on word that it plans an
inventory-slashing move to give business customers free monitors and
other accessories with purchases of its desktop personal computers.
Goldman Sachs analyst Rick Schutte said the move will likely be the first
of many promotions as computer makers engage in aggressive pricing to
rid themselves of older technology. Schutte expects the move to reduce
Compaq's inventory levels, but believes it will cost the company in the
near term. Schutte, who didn't change his earnings estimate, said he's
already taken into account price erosion following Compaq's earnings
warning last month. Compaq shares ended the session up 1/16 at 25
7/16.

Chip-equipment manufacturer Novellus Systems Inc. (NVLS) gained 2.3
percent after BancAmerica Robertson Stephens initiated coverage with a
long-term "attractive" rating. The firm cited Novellus' leadership in the
chemical vapor deposition market as well as its progress in developing
processing equipment for the transition to copper instead of aluminum
wires in semiconductors. BA Robertson Stephens forecast earnings of
$2.35 in fiscal 1998 and $3.25 in 1999. Novellus shares edged up 1 to
close at 44.

Shares of IBM Corp. (IBM) and Motorola Corp. (MOT) each advanced
after the two companies introduced an improved version of the PowerPC
microprocessor. The new chip runs at 300 megahertz, compared to prior
speeds of 266 megahertz. The Power PC chip is primarily installed in
computers using Apple's (AAPL) Mac OS operating system. IBM closed
up 1 5/8 at 101 1/4 and Motorola closed up 3/8 at 56 5/8.

Kemet Corp. (KMET) dipped following a downgrade from BT Alex.
Brown. The firm lowered the shares to "market perform" from "buy."
Kemet manufactures capacitors, used to store, filter and regulate electrical
energy flow in computer products. Shares closed down 3/8 at 19 11/16.

Information Storage Devices Inc. (ISDI) shed 16 percent following a
first-quarter earnings warning. The integrated circuit maker said it sees
revenue falling short of analysts' expectations by 20 percent. Analysts
expected earnings of 1 cent a share. The company attributed the shortfall
to postponed orders by a major customer and lower-than-expected
orders from a Japanese customer. On the news, BancAmerica Robertson
Stephens lowered its first-quarter estimate to a loss of 11 cents a share,
and it cut its revenue forecast to $12 million from $15 million. Information
Storage shares closed down 1 1/8 at 5 7/8.

Binti T. Harvey is an online reporter for CBS MarketWatch.



To: Mark Oliver who wrote (2861)3/16/1998 11:41:00 PM
From: LK2  Respond to of 9256
 
Please skip this post. Made a mistake. EOM



To: Mark Oliver who wrote (2861)3/17/1998 6:51:00 AM
From: Gus  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 9256
 
It's always difficult to call a bottom on these things, Mark. Purely as a matter of self-preservation, I am operating under the assumption that the Chinese will have to devalue their currency sooner or better yet, later. There are reported rumors that the US is holding out WTO (World Trade Organization) membership as an enticement for China not to devalue its currency while its Asian neighbors are still recovering from the aftershocks of the current crisis. Whatever the timing, the consensus is that the devaluation of the Chinese currency could set off another round of destabilizing region-wide devaluations.

As it relates to SEG, my understanding is that all its FX contracts expire at the end of its fiscal year (June 1998). I don't think it's quite accurate to say that SEG has been setting aside money to cover its currency losses because as you know, SEG's currency losses are mark to market losses that stem from the fact that SEG could have delivered fewer dollars to receive the stipulated amount of local currency had it not entered into those forward contracts.

In other words, starting in July 1997 (the start of its 1998 fiscal year), SEG contracted to deliver a little over $1.0 billion on dates specified in the contracts over a period of one year in exchange for the contracted equivalent in local currency (baht, S$, ringgit) which they then use to fund their local operations. As those local currency are expensed as operating expenses (current year) or depreciation and amortization, these are then converted to SEG's functional currency, the US dollar, at the prevailing market rates.

To provide just one reference point as to how the currency contracts figure in SEG's overseas manufacturing and assembly lines, SEG's Thailand operations annually "import" $1.0 billion worth of raw materials and semi-finished goods from other SEG units and "export" roughly $2.0 billion of semi-finished goods to other SEG units. US dollars generated by "exports" are used to pay for "imports"

The easy argument to make is that since SEG could have used fewer dollars to generate the same amount of local currencies, they should include the mark to market losses under operating expenses instead of other expenses especially since the local currency equivalent of those contracted dollars are booked as expenses (read: impact on operating earnings) using the presumably higher currency rates. But what about those expenses that get depreciated or amortized over a number of years? Obviously, you distort the accounting when you immediately expense those items that should be depreciated or amortized.

Derivatives accounting is undergoing a major revision. The consensus is that companies should do more to make their derivatives exposure more visible to their publics (stockholders, lenders, customers, etc). The last time I checked, there was no consensus yet on how to do this. I believe the accounting community and the business community are still at loggerheads on how to modernize derivatives accounting. I think the current battleground is Congress and there is a major bill containing the GAAP's proposal which making its way through the legislative maze. Anybody care to check the current status?

But, to answer the second part of your question directly, even if SEG's puts its currency woes behind it, the bigger question is how is this industry realignment going to play out? Currently, the Big 3 -- SEG, QNTM, and WDC -- are losing market share to the Up and Coming 3 -- IBM, Fujitsu and Maxtor. I seriously doubt that the Big 3 can continue to cut capacity while the Up and Coming 3 are continuing to add capacity especially since the cheap PCs have made scale even more important. Does it not make sense that at some painful point, the Big 3 will just have to kill off its rivals' momentum even if it means sacrificing profitability even more than they are doing now? I don't think I want to have any money in this sector when that starts to happen. But, that's just me. What do you think?

Regards,

Gus