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: Knighty Tin who wrote (35529)	6/21/1998 11:52:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Mike, if they are dead meat, then all they gave away was 20% of dead meat for $750 MM green stuff and some fancy real estate (I mean production facilities). I think you underestimate the importance of a marketing windows to Japan and Europe that this acquisition provides. You are right, there was no other place to get $750 MM to tidy them over, thus I still stand by my characterization of this move as a financial and strategic masterpiece. You may think that being in the DRAM business is a losing proposition for ever, and you might even be right, but if the only survival modality for MU is through the DRAM business, this move gives them some (not necessarily all) of the prerequisites to execute their plan. Zeev

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35529)	6/21/1998 12:40:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 53903

Mike, If things are looking bleak to you, for MU after this acquistion, can I assume you are continuing to buy more PUTS in future months? I am currently sitting with 40 MUGF's that I had used for short positions. I am now thinking about selling them. I recently bought 20 MUJE's b/c rightly or wrongly I think MU will move up from here. Now I may not be trading this for a while until the dust settles on this acquisition. But I would just like to play for a 10 point move during the next six month time period. Now granted it may be silly by all the bears measures, but for myself I would like to try it. Now here is what I am considering and if it is not too much trouble please comment: 1) Sell MUGF's 2) When MU goes over 25, Buy out-of-money PUTS for inurance such as 20 MUVD's, Also will add to CALLS by buying 20 more MUJEs 3) When MU goes over 28 rollover 40 MUJE's and buy 50 MUJF's... Also buy 10 MUVE PUTS to add to 20 MUVD's 4) When MU goes over 31, rollover 50 MUJF's to 60 MUJG's or 50 MUMG's also buy 10 MUVF Now I know I may change my mind along the way and may even do some shorting if the opportunity is there. What I would like to know is if this is a sensible strategy for buying options on a stock that one might expect a large move in a short (6 month) period. I was also wondering if as the stock moves up to say 28 and 31 should I be buying significantly more calls then I suggested. TIA DavidG

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35529)	6/22/1998 8:51:00 AM
From: Kathleen capps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Michael, I've been in the process of moving so I don't have access to most of my MU notes. But I thought they only had another 500 mil of shelf debt available and from what I've read on the forum and web, more than that amount was involved in this deal. Also, for all: MU would have been in default of their loans last quarter except for a last minute deal in Feb that revised the terms of the LOC. It was interesting to note at the time that the terms were made less stringent for the quarter (allowing MU to avoid default as of 28 Feb) but the fiscal year requirements were not relaxed. One last thing. Since the number of shares has increased by approximently 10%, should we reduce the current EPS extimates by 10% to account in a rough preliminary way for the TI/MU deal. That's not counting all the extra interest, etc, of course. Kathleen

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (35529)	6/22/1998 9:13:00 AM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

MB, Herb Greenberg had an interesting take from Drew Peck in today's TSC: thestreet.com "Basically, TI is taking advantage of an odd quirk on Wall Street -- that investors seem to be oblivious to the size of the charges that are being taken," says Cowen's Drew Peck, one of the few chip analysts who hasn't lauded the deal. Instead, he says, investors are focused on future earnings (sounds good in principle, right?) and from that standpoint, it's quite a story. "It is that fact," he adds, "that made this deal a miracle of modern accounting."...According to Peck, investors are "totally ignorant" of the return on invested capital for each company, "which remains awful." What's more, he says, "There's no net increase in productive capabilities for each company. Yet on paper, it looks golden.'' Sometimes I wonder if investors (some investors) aren't the only one's ignorant of ROIC. Appleton lauds his company for being "focused". Well, fine. If things work out as expected, they'll do alright in terms of becoming profitable, but I'd love to know how (or if) they manage to derive their cost of capital and internal hurdle rate and justify them. Is it "since we're a DRAM company, anything we do will pay off down the road when things turn, so - let's do it!"? That would tend to solve calculating the beta for projects dependent on DRAM prices <g> Good trading, Tom