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 : THREE FIVE SYSTEM (TFS) - up from here? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: dfloydr who wrote (1240)4/5/1998 6:30:00 PM
From: michael c. dodge  Respond to of 3247
 
This comment is about the digital projector market. In May, 1995, after five years of development, and $200M of R&D, TI announced its "patented Digital Mirror Device" (now called Digital Light Processing subsystems, or "DLP"). On April 1, 1996, TI announced contracts with thirteen projector OEMS for this technology. Those customers included ASK, Davis, Electrohome, InFocus, Liesegang, Nokia, Projectavision, Proxima, Rank Brimar, Runco, Sony and Vidikron.

These projectors have been available for about 6 months, now, led by the InFocus Litepro 420. Ampro Corp., in Melbourne, FL, has a DLP projector integrated with an onboard Win95 computer---all in one form factor......PowerPoint ready.

The DLP engine has about 508,800 mirrors in a 1.5 X 1.0 Centimeter chip. Each mirror is a pixel, and flexes about 10 degrees to deflect the light. This is a tough one, because the mirror will switch up to 1,000 times per second, and reflects 60% of the light (all according to TI materials).....which mean more precise color, grey scale, and definition on screen.

However, the device requires memory and signal processing...comes in one, two and three-chip systems...the more chips, the brighter the image, and the more expensive. All are more expensive than the AMLCD's used by others.

The LCoS will likely turn out to be cheaper. Maybe by $5-$10 per (just my conjecture). The engine is not the cost driver....the optics are. Nevertheless, TI has a significant advantage in being first to market. TI has also built demo TV's and PC monitors using the DLP, and has been trying to sell the idea to various OEM's for more than a year, using the demo models.

There will be more than one winner, and TFS will likely be one of the winners, because it knows how to manufacture and build its devices in a highly complementary way for the OEM. Business skills count more than technology; you can count a dozen examples, starting with Microsoft. My judgment is that anything we get in LCoS will be because of TFS' business skills, not because of differentiating technology.

I am looking at digital projectors and their industry, because Infocus has tanked, and I have wanted to buy the stock for about 2 years. Now, I am looking at the digital projector industry, and I see the PC unit price model running amok. VGA, 700 Lumens on the screen, less than 8 lbs., coming at you less than $1,500. You heard it here first.

Can there be ANY winners in that environment ???



To: dfloydr who wrote (1240)4/5/1998 7:51:00 PM
From: Noblesse Oblige  Respond to of 3247
 
Hi D Floyd....

It is my understanding that Mr. Lang remains on the Board of Directors of Refac despite his retirement from "active duty." I think Raefon posted that a couple of days ago.

Although not an attorney, it is patently clear to me that if he is on Refac's Board and owns personal stock, that virtually every attorney in the country would conclude that there was some cross ownership influences...and this would require a 13D filing.

Why TFS has chosen not to list Lang as a 5% holder *while* Lang hasn't updated his 13D (apparently signifying that he still believes he should be a filer) is a very good question.

Perhaps someone at the annual meeting will ask about that? I know that I, for one, would feel more "comfortable" knowing that the company in which I own so many shares is filing accurate information with the regulatory agencies.

Have a good day.