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: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (43879)	3/16/1999 11:01:00 AM
From: TREND1	Respond to of 53903

Tad Luckly for TA types, the stock market sorts out all these fundamental statements. Larry Dudash

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (43879)	3/16/1999 12:02:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Tad, Appreciate your coming on to the thread to voice your opinions but don't let your bias get in the way of shading the facts. What's scary about this process is when opinion is stated as fact..... "Micron Technology is the largest supplier of DRAM memories [sic] in the world with 15-17% market share after the acquisition of Texas Instrument' DRAM assets." This, of course, was palpable nonsense that would not have stood up to the most cursory investigation, but was stated as fact. This was actually fact at the time it was written. When MU took over TXN fabs the combined output was some 60% increase which was considered close to Samsung if not more...and certainly more than LG and Hyundai individually. Since the acquisition ...changes occured and one TXN fab was closed and another was used for non-production work while the remaining TXN fabs and MU fabs were upgraded to .18microns. Not sure what your objectives are on this thread but all I can request of you is for you not go the way of the "forever bears" b/c at most times their credibility is questioned and their motives suspect. Good Luck DavidG

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (43879)	3/18/1999 10:20:00 PM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Tad, believe it or not, it gets worse. BBRS research note, 3-1-99, "Hardware Industry Update" (boldface, my emphasis): "We are further encouraged given that Micron is about 25% of the DRAM market and that their bit production is up at least 50% sequentially that DRAM pricing has actually gone higher with PC units down 8% sequentially." That's quite a bold statement. Actually, two bold statements of fact. As far as that market share figure, it's also perhaps the most ludicrous single statement I have ever seen written on this stock. Here's why... I don't have the SIA DRAM figures for Dec. or Jan. (and they don't even have them themselves for Feb.), but I'll take a guessimate that over Dec, Jan, and Feb global DRAM sales will end up being somewhere around $3.8 bil. So, if it is "given" (that certainly looks like a statement of fact to me up there in that research note excerpt) that "MU is about 25% of the DRAM market" then they have had 25% of a $3.8 bil. in sales over the Dec-Feb period. So, given the "fact" that they are "25% of the DRAM market" they should post $950 mil. in chips alone. Can we all agree that figure is just BEYOND insane? Please? It would imply a 132% sequential rev. increase in just chips alone, as they did $409.5 mil last quarter. Will they show a sequential % increase in chip revs.? I certainly think they will. Will that percentage be even close to flirting with triple digits? No. And the thing is, the question isn't "why wouldn't it"... ...it's "how could it?" How is that even mathematically possible? Just for the sake of argument assume they sold every last byte of the alleged "50% sequential increase in bits" they made this Q AND they sold every last bit in inventory. Did ASP's change enough to allow a +132% sequential revenue increase even assuming the best possible scenario? No. IMHO, that's Tad's point when it comes to the absolutely mind-boggling hubris being demonstrated by some of his peers and the need for clarification. I am eyeballing the 3.8 bil, and I think I'm in the ballpark, but I'm sure someone can post the Dec. and Jan. DRAM figures from the SIA and pin down the numbers further. I'd appreciate it, as I believe you could run through the same exercise and you'd still see how ludicrous that total b.s. about "25%" market share really is. Good trading, Tom