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: steve olivier who wrote (39017)	9/25/1998 10:22:00 AM
From: Chas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

I am not a bear but I believe MU does not have the output they would like to have with pc100 64M and is trying to catch up to the current demand, most likely they are working on yield improvements, so it does not make sense to cut back.(my opinion here) The other suppliers cut back because they have a huge capacity and cannot afford to continue selling at losses and hope by cutting back it will stabilize the price so they dont have to ship every part with a yen or won tied around it. Reference the Samsung article earlier this week mentioning that the cut back is working and I know all the Koreans are cutting back in Oct and most plan to raise prices on Oct 1. .Thats my opinion. Good trading.

To: steve olivier who wrote (39017)	9/25/1998 10:57:00 AM
From: Trey McAtee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

steve-- amateur<G>. asking the wrong questions. dont buy the hype...there is nothing special about this company...they arent an especially low cost producer, others are probably as cheap if not cheaper. see thats the neat thing about being known as the low cost producer...its terribly difficult to prove or disprove. but since most of the talent has left the building, its a safe bet they arent as good at cost cutting as they used to be, if they were they would be profitable now. mu gonna own the DRAM market, eh mon? being the top manufacturer in a money losing environment only means one thing to me....you are losing money too. why isnt it dropping? who knows. why did it ever go up? well, the excuse this go around are all the good DRAM prices. whatever. its a loser and something only worth trading...watch david and dont get trapped in a fundamentals debate on this one (if you do, dont take the bull side<G>). or, if you dont like to be attached constantly to a screen, pick up some puts. and wait a few weeks. good luck to all, trey

To: steve olivier who wrote (39017)	9/25/1998 11:24:00 AM
From: yard_man	Respond to of 53903

It's got to go up so I can get back in for some more easy money??? <g>

To: steve olivier who wrote (39017)	9/25/1998 1:37:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 53903

steve, mu had tons and tons of inventory a while back. they have to run at full speed times 2 to keeps costs down. they don't play these games like the koreans do. if korea had not played this game in 1997 then mu may be near bnankruptcy as we speak. mu's future is in the hands of a few business people in another country. not enviable, imho.

To: steve olivier who wrote (39017)	9/26/1998 7:06:00 AM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

steve i believe that you have the correct answer to this question. The higher the marginal cost, the more important it is to hold back product to get a higher price. The closer you are to break even the move likely that you are to ramp up production and try to decrease costs enough to become profitable that way. This is the normal way in which high cost producers are squeezed out. In the end the low cost producer usually wins unless they run out of money first, and the bears believe MU will run out of money. Some of the bears dispute that MU is the low cost producer. Others such as Trey even dispute that they are a low cost producer. But the actions of MU of continuing to increase production imply that they believe that they can lower costs below the current and future selling price and become profitable that way. Otherwise they would also be reducing production to attempt to prop up prices. Carl