To: Fabeyes who wrote (44038 ) 3/20/1999 7:45:00 AM From: Earlie Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 53903
Fabeyes: I'm on your side. I KNOW that their test troubles continue, although not quite the mess of a few months ago. As is the case with many companies, the engineering types are honest, while management leaves something to be desired. I also agree with you that they continue to sell below all-up cost, but this can be hidden through inventory and other accounting tricks for a bit yet. As noted in earlier posts, MU is now my number one "put" choice,... and not just for a single reason. From that lengthy list found in the post you referenced, the debt carry costs and the lack of cash to make the upgrades, rank very high for me. The fact that the company must hump the expensive output from the TXN cast-offs also ranks right up there. Companies sometimes reach a point where an examination of the balance sheet tells you that their continued good health requires a miracle and that the assets of the company are actually owned by the debt holders. These types of companies enter my "close-to-mortally-wounded" file. This is precisely how I view MU at the moment. There is no better risk/reward situation than shorting a "mortally wounded" company. The selling pressure that emanates from TXN's desire to flog that truck load of paper before it becomes board room wall paper, as well as Intel's need to sell to jazz up its weakening earnings statement, makes this a "no-brainer". To me, anyone who acquires a long position at this point in time, has simply put his/her head in the sand (or conversely ignored the facts in favour of a chart) and deserves the roasting that is getting underway. Every once in a while, even in a mania, the fundamentals extract a horrible revenge. Best, Earlie