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: Kerry Phineas who wrote (43760)	3/12/1999 9:14:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Respond to of 53903

Kerry, absolutely. What's even funnier is throwing in the interesting data point that came out in the SBN piece: However, the Boise, Idaho, memory maker has privately told analysts that production shot up at a 50% bit-growth rate in the company's last fiscal quarter, ended Feb. 28, compared to the previous three-month period. Prior posts have them giving 20% guidance on the 12-23-98 conf. call. Then at one of the 0-for-February conferences they started talking 35% bit growth, only if you go back and look at the coverage in the financial press, the press was citing prior guidance as 25%. Now they're saying 50%. I totally agree on Niles. He's not going to down the thing anytime soon. If anything, he'll raise his earnings estimates. They report March 22. He's due for a pre-earnings tout. His assumptions have changed, but his model hasn't (at least the one that goes with the "non-private client" stuff you get off E*Trade). It's options expiration week. The stock is tanking. In his presentation, Bedard said that pricing has been somewhat stable quarter to quarter for Micron, although the spot price for DRAMs now is between $9.20 and $9.30 per chip, compared with about $9.80 before Christmas. Contract chip prices are about $9 now, compared with between $9.40 and $9.45 before Christmas. I thought the contract pricing would be higher. Could that be part of why the headline on the Dow Jones piece took it to 57, but it didn't hold it? Not that they're trending lower, but that the assumptions for what the contract pricing was over the quarter could have been too aggressive? Good trading, Tom