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: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (45682)	5/9/1999 10:14:00 PM
From: Land_Lubber	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

A thesis seems to have been presented by various posters here, if I understand it correctly, that Micron hoards inventory when the price is dropping in order to reduce supply and force prices up again; to be able to eventually sell the inventory at a higher price. However, since the financials must show the inventory at the lower of cost or market value, the approach of the end-of-quarter becomes an incentive to "cut losses" and quickly sell as much as possible whatever the price. This, of course, causes the price to plummet sharply, which is exactly what we have seen in the last few weeks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Micron's end-of-quarter cut off is May 8, or something like that. Now here is my own speculation: if all the above is true, Micron may now start to hold back parts, accumulating inventory once again, in an attempt to force prices back up. This is pure guesswork on my part. Comments? Land_Lubber

To: Thomas G. Busillo who wrote (45682)	5/10/1999 9:27:00 AM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Tom, They were the ones who killed their UK project at the same time that MU was expanding it own fab capacity by "buying" TI's DRAM ops. Not totally true! Although MU increased its own capacity by buying TXN fabs, it reduced the overall potential DRAM sector capacity by closing some TXN fabs and converting one to non-DRAM production. Now it is true MU upgraded the surviving fabs to .21m, but that was expected to happen anyway. I just want you to know I am listening to your posts. <g> Good Luck Trading DavidG PS: I still find Fabeyes yield numbers for Korean vs MU a little hard to believe...but if MU does reach the same yields...who do you blame for the future glut???? I think it is just the nature of the commodity business.