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: Earlie who wrote (43955)	3/17/1999 3:37:00 PM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Earlie, you wrote To support this price, one needs some sort of future earnings. Nonsense. That was in the olden days. This is a new era of investing, remember? Look at a company like BYND which after a sizeable loss last year is projected to lose $2.78 this year, another $1.92 next year, and $.95 in the year after that with no profits in sight. Profits? Nah. If you have profits that holds back your valuation because then you can compute a PE and people will expect a reasonable PE. But if you are losing money, the value can be anything. Thus since MU is losing money, they can easily go back to 100. However, if they start making money again then the valuation will have to fall. <VBG> Carl

To: Earlie who wrote (43955)	3/17/1999 9:39:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Earlie, I see we still agree to disagree.<g> What I need to know is where did you git your license from?....that is the license to change what I posted.<ggg> I didn't say "S.E.Asian Dram producers in trouble" what I said was "SEA companies were ( and in some cases still) in financial trouble forcing them behind". Some would be Hyundai and LG. IT didn't necessarily have to be Samsung although I thought they also had a very high debt to equity. Also, since you brought it up, did the Samsung profit you quoted just include DRAM or was that the overall business. I could be wrong but I understood their DRAM portion of the business lost money. Anyway next issue MU has already completed their .18 micron upgrade on MU fabs and indicated the TXN fabs would be completed by mid 99...so I am not sure what your issue is about not having enuf cash to complete their upgrades unless you are talking about sub .18 microns. Upgrades are always occurring so I am not sure where you were going. OOPS!!!! you did it again. I didn't say "MU in a much better position than its competitors". I said "MU company is in a much better position than most of their competitors". One more time and I will have to revoke your license.<g>. As far as MU continuing their dumping charges on Asian companies, you can bet on it they will continue their police work and continue with the charges otherwise the dumping will start all over again and I believe no one else wants this again. As far as the 16mb/64mb crossover...it did not occur 'til very late in the 16mb cycle. The main reason... everyone and the grandmother was making 16mb chips and dumping them for practically nothing. There wasn't any need to buy 64mb chips at the then low prices of $10 when the 16mb chips were going for as low as $1.50. The memory modules didn't matter whether there were 16mb or 64mb chips to make 8, 16, and 32mbyte memory modules. They pretty much performed in the same way. It isn't until you require 64mbyte modules that you MUST go to 64mb chips. Anyway 64mb chips came late in the cycle and I don't know that there is anything else I can say to help you understand this. OOPS again!!!! I didn't say "And you say that all houses will have two or three near term"...but rather I said "Not only will all the homes without a Pc now buy one but expect to see two or three in a typical home just like a tv or stereo. " I didn't mention near term or any time frame but rather just that those that do not have PC's can not easily afford one and those that already have one can now have many in the same way a typical home today has multiple tv's and stereos. LICENSE REVOKED!!!<GGG> Anyway it is my opinion...and I don't think it is unreasonable...after all in my home we have four pc's.<ggg> Whew!!! Good Luck DavidG PS: BTW games aren't the only memory hogs today. MSFT products alway were and always will be. Win 98 requires a minimum 32mbytes and preferably 64mbytes. Don't rely on Gates he is full of baloney.<vbg>