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: sandstuff who wrote (40257)	10/22/1998 7:21:00 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 53903

RE:Why not file against all non-US DRAM manufacturers??? It also begs the question of how Intel views this, in light of Intel's need for more DRAM manufacturers producing high bandwidth products. Some of the most state-of-art fabs are located in Taiwan. Did Intel provide $500 Million so Micron could restrict competition?...I don't think so... One explanation could be that all but one of Taiwanese foundries are not directly licensed to manufacture DR-DRAM. I do not know the exact terms of a Rambus DR-DRAM license, but just suppose that this filing may be related to Intel applying pressure to foundries in Taiwan to get a DR-DRAM license. The foundries have built up a large amount of capacity that is currently under-utilized. They and the current "pure" DRAM manufacturers have been loath to pay the future royalties. Maybe this is a way to play the foundries off the DRAM makers and force reluctant parties in either group to accelerate licensing/manufacturing providing further assurance of a healthy supply of DR-DRAM? This would not benefit Micron, as much as would Intel, but Intel is dangling a pretty juicy carrot with the $500M. Take a look at Rambus' 10Q and it says: To date, companies based in Japan and Korea have accounted for most of the Company's revenues, and for the substantial majority of its international revenues. In the third quarter and first nine months of fiscal 1998, international revenues comprised 70% and 75% of total revenues, respectively. The Company expects that revenues derived from international licensees will continue to represent a significant portion of its total revenues in the future. All of the revenues from international licensees to date have been denominated in United States dollars. sec.gov That's my wild ass speculation and it's probably wrong, but it might be true. I'm open to hearing other theories. Bob PS Or maybe the Taiwanese are easier targets.