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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35434)6/19/1998 1:49:00 PM
From: mike iles  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 53903
 
Mike,

Agree that these guys are chewin' up cash at a pretty healthy rate and the TI deal will only make that worse, a lot worse ... but the $750M saves their bacon for this cycle. Despite that I still think the stock will tank to single digits over the next 6 months or so. Wall St. eventually gets tired of large losses. Depends if DRAM prices stay underwater.

Where my thinking has changed is that Appleton would be a good horse to back if the price is right. On the one side you have slimy investor relations (the secret pre-release) but outweighing (?) that you have strong leadership and tenacity ... given what's happened in DRAM in the last couple of years, it's a credit to them that they're still alive.

regards, Mike



To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35434)6/19/1998 4:31:00 PM
From: Earlie  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 53903
 
MB:
Good comments, especially with respect to MU's 64 Mbit production. As noted in earlier posts, when a large percentage of one's yield is deposited in the dumpster, the bottom line needs even more accounting massage. (g)
I was stunned that the inventory was not written off this quarter, along with the big loss. You have to love a company that keeps darned near a whole quarter's worth of its products in the warehouse.
No doubt there is even a broad selection of colours (g)
Best Earlie



To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35434)6/20/1998 11:51:00 AM
From: John Graybill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 53903
 
>>64M crossover

Note that they are talking about *bit* crossover, not *unit* crossover. That means they're still below 20% units of 64M chips (4x the # of 16M chips compared to 64M chips.)