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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (18640)	5/31/1999 2:19:00 PM
From: patrick tang	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Jock, 1. Using $2.17B or whatever as 'average' - I think the real # that matters, i.e. the one that the street is interested in, is the $435M for Q4 from which sales increases will be based. The earnings expectations will be as laid out in their Oct. cc. The $435M was for both LSI and Symbios together the first time and thus things in the future will be judged to that. LSI pretty much met the earnings expectations for Q1, hence they decided to cut back 1 - 2% for sales growth to 'stuff' Q2. From all indications, I think they probably can do >6% growth for Q2, but unless they absolutely have to because of customer demands, they will probably push back shipments by one weekend so it will come it right at 6%. Growth companies 'control' the #s that way everyday. Gives them credibility with the street. 2. I don't see much 'evilness' in INTC and MSFT. Part business and part necessity - at the beginning of such phenominal growth of a brand new technology, I think it is ncesssary to have leaders to push things forward. Once it matures, then the functionality takes over and nobody cares what's inside as long as it works- linux in PSII, MediaGX webpads, StrongARM, total don't care. Monopoly will be broken, but not in the traditional way as another 'dorminant' guy takes over. But we need the technology to mature and stabilize first for that to happen. 3. Malaysia allows LSI to time the 12". Without Malaysia, LSI has to go for another fab once they are maxed out. With Malaysia, they can use that as buffer for another year or even more. They will get a choice as to when to do the 12". Without Malaysia, they have to go once current Gresham is maxed out - no choice. But Malaysia is also a two edged sword. In downturns they are competition. I persume that whoever is doing Coreware at Gresham can go over to Malaysia and go for a lower price. Only condolense is LSI will get some royalty for that. That is why you do not see TSMC and UMC partnering - they even have tight non-discosures with customers as to the details of their process so customers can't just go to another fab for lower price. patrick

To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (18640)	5/31/1999 7:25:00 PM
From: shane forbes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Jock: (1) Convertibles are not equity offerings. The stock dropped because of the hedging that usually takes place when these happen. Check out Conexant's similarly placed convertible. Convertibles are pseudo-equity securities. LSI did a convert in 1994 as well and I would not have sold then. Basically LSI swapped convertible debt for bank debt - a good thing. (2) The reason I say 'I think' LSI was cap constrained was the revenue gains were nowhere close to what I would have expected (profits were better than expected). In addition, we had the articles about the possible foundry deals and how LSI wanted to move production there if conditions warranted. Plus the delay in closing down the Japanese facility. (3) Lawyers are rats - that's all I have to say to that stupid point. Egging people on just won't work. Boy and you are just plain stupid. Revenues are revenues. You can't write off revenues! Idiot. Accounting quackery does not change economic reality. As to some of the other stuff about DVD etc check the date on that post - Nov 1997. That's a 7. Besides I have found that it does not matter to dot every i and cross every t since in the whole I often get lucky (opportunity meets preparation) and conservatism somewhere more than makes up for aggressiveness elsewhere - in 1997, I did not foresee the strength in networking, I did not foresee the strength in storage, I sure as hell did not foresee the debacle in Asia (basically this pushes out everything 1 year). Oh yeah and BTW your ability to use a search engine does not impress me. Ignoring the rest of your crap. And don't bother replying to this or any more of my posts in the future. Your crap never changes - why don't you go back to Iomega thread and hassle people there. Or elsewhere. If you can make ad homenim attacks then so can I. And don't bother sending me a PM because I'll ignore that too.

To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (18640)	5/31/1999 8:00:00 PM
From: shane forbes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Jock: I lost part of the reply. The convertible offering was to replace bank debt not for cap. additions. If I have to spell out every single detail in every single post and mark every single post with references to previously posted points just so that people who can't think through the whole thing can pick and choose their bits and pieces then posting here would be a real chore. I've learnt one thing is that I would like to have nothing to do with OPM (Other People's Money) and to all the idiots who read these posts and make decisions based on them the laughs on you. It takes hard work to decide if a stock is a good buy. Easy ways out don't work if you want to be in a stock for years. People like you who want to run home to Mommy because they followed someone else and bought in the low 20's are of the biggest boneheads around. It takes me roughly 3-4 months to figure out what's really going on in a company and though there have been mistakes these were more a result of cheering for the littlest hobo than errors in the financial analysis. And I have no problem making errors or losing money this way! It is people who love money (YOU and some of the idiots here) who get thoroughly bent out of shape when the disastrous opportunity costs hit home. Tough. That's life. From every mistake I make I learn. From every cheap stock I have bought only to see it go cheaper I have learnt. And that to me is the essence. If you and you half a zillion minutes of 'investing experience' is swayed by what you see here you are the biggest idiot of them all. And ditto to any other idiot who thinks it is 'easy' to invest and it is 'easy' to fully understand the accounting gimmicks and the companies that don't want to fully disclose the underlying strengths and weaknesses of their businesses. Idiots get rich when other idiots follow. Start your own club. OPM is not my style. Like my distaste for lawyers I find brokers similarly despicable (esp. as it pertains to the smaller people - the people who can afford to lose money the least). As to the naming of Storage Systems - big woof. All I care about is that 75% of what came from Symbios was chip related and 25% was not. What LSI calls a System, taking a larger perspective I can view as a component. Otherwise I'd be calling all of LSI's chips components and I prefer chips - less typing. If it misled anyone well oops. And as you realize I don't write these as I write term papers or news articles. I am not checking each and every name as doing so would take much too much time. I am a firm believer in storage and that is why I could care less (and investigated even less) the fine nuances of nomenclature. Now wasn't it you who at the very bottom of LSI's stock price - $11 - said: 'What's there to like' re: the restructuring. So before you go imparting your nonsense, make sure YOU know how to analyze these things before you speak. I think I said LSI joining the big boys or some such thing after the Q3 release. I had been looking for a lowering of the cost structure and that finally came. I recall you bemoaning the lack of R&D and your Way-Too-Simple-Peter-Lynchism-for-the-Masses 'Lowering R&D is bad blah blah blah' or the 'Gross Margins are down so that"s bad argument". Boy or boy. Sure I could find your posts post Q3 release but I'll leave it you since you are so good with your search engine. All I know that after a crappy April'98-Sept'98, my returns are back to being large and life is good. Nuff said.