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: SlowThinker who wrote (41873)	1/5/1999 2:48:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

>>The other way is to just do a valuation based on the net present value of the stream of future earnings.<< you better use earnings b/c cash flow is negative over the long haul - hence the billions in debt accrued AFTER the largest BOOM in the history of dram. as for analysis, that is a nice view of demand side analysis that had had mu making $17 a share in 1996. instead of earning $17 a share, it traded at $17 a share. oooops ;-) remember this (or learn it): cost reductions require huge output increases and that, in turn, affects pricing negatively.

To: SlowThinker who wrote (41873)	1/5/1999 2:51:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 53903

slow, sub $600 boxes are 16% of the market and growing FAST. don't think they have 66 megs. try 32. and growing. not the megs, the market share. low end is more and more popular and the low end has fewer megs. demand growth is quite strong and has been for many years. unfortunately, those that focused on demand w/o a good analysis of supply have been absurdly wrong when predicting mu's business future. well, that is why the analysts are paid the BIG bucks. it ain't easy being always wrong ;-)