The burden of proof lies on you my friend. Prove to me that intel and rambus deserve to be sued under anti-trust laws. I am just calling you out for your off the wall accusations.
Comment completely devoid of content. Par for your course.
The burden of proof lies on you my friend. Prove to me that intel and rambus deserve to be sued under anti-trust laws. I am just calling you out for your off the wall accusations.
I think what both Egan and Fink are saying is ultimate solution is combination of austerity measures, liberalization of economy, and writedown of debt to sufficient level so that economies can grow out of problems, over time. Greece got 50% haircut, but I have heard commentary that debt really needed to be written down by 60 - 70% if Greece is actually going to have a chance to grow and pay off remaining debt rather than being indentured servant to lenders forever going forward; banks supposed writing off debt at 40% of face value already).
Quantitiative Easing by ECB will buy countries a year or two to get their fiscal houses in order, but Germany doesn't want to agree to that until Italy et. al. agree to iron - clad austerity measures first.
(At least that's my take on what I think they said).
Off the wall accusations were Rambus vs Hynix and Micron, and the jury threw them out.
Both Intel and Rambus have a long history of anti-trust troubles of their own.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15693340"While the ECB's role in solving the debt crisis is necessary, it is certainly not sufficient.
The Italians must play their part by getting their finances under control, and - far more importantly - by reforming their economy to make it more competitive and less under the sway of the kind of cosy business interests embodied by their outgoing prime minister.
That leaves the ECB and Italy in a dangerous game of chicken.
The ECB doesn't want to budge until it is clear that Italy is serious about reform.
Nor does it want to dictate to Italy what reforms it must undertake - the ECB, after all, does not do politics. That is why the International Monetary Fund has now been called in, in an advisory capacity.
But any Italian government would be crazy to push through unpopular reforms unless it is assured that the ECB will ultimately come to its rescue.
In a game of chicken, the best tactic is to convince your opponent that you are crazy enough to risk a catastrophe."
Disagree completely.
The Department of Justice, on Micron's request, went after Rambus. After wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money all the way to the Supreme Court, came up empty handed. Their Administrative Law Judge McGuire completely exonerated Rambus, stating "...the commission has taken an aggressive interpretation of rather weak evidence.":
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/02/rambusid.shtm
Rambus did not have "off-the-wall" accusations. In fact, the FTC case against them helped them uncover damning documents, including:
Managing Director of International Sales Linda Turner. Ms. Turner was responding to reports by her staff that Hynix was lowering its DDR pricing: "No problem! We want DDR to explode into the marketplace so have actually been requesting Infineon, Samsung, and Hynix to lower their DDR pricing to help it become a standard and drive Rambus away completely."
http://rambus.org/legal/menace.pdf
Willie Meyer, IBM, "Rambus is a deadly menace. One day all computers will have to be built like this, but hopefully without the royalties going to Rambus."
October 1999, an Intel manager explained to Intel's Peter MacWiliams, "so far all our discussions with Appleton (Micron CEO) have had zero benefit for us, we have gone out of our way to help them resolve Rambus contract issues and in return we have gotten nothing but deception. Micron is working very hard to do everything against RDRAM." (RX 1515 at 2)
Farhad Tabrizi, Hynix executive, in his June 2000 email to Park, Tabrizi stated: "I really want to ask you to let me go back to my old mode of RDRAM killing. I think we were very close to achieving our goal until you said we are absolutely committed to this baby."
From the FTC evidence: ''Jeff Mailloux, a senior Micron executive, President Tabrizi on February 20, 1998 that he had called a reporter and had told him that RDRAM was "at least 30% more expensive to manufacture than SDRAM. Mr. Mailloux urged Mr. Tabrizi to make a similar call to the reporter, warning Mr. Tabrizi not to forward his email to anyone and asked Mr. Tabrizi "Anyhow, please visit me if I end up in jail, but felt it was important and timely enough to get our message out there that 5% is not realistic in our opinion."
Hynix manager Andy Ha that Hynix "get together with Samsung and ask them to suggest to Micron to have a joint management meeting for RDRAM/DDR price control in the future."
Like I said before, I am completely baffled how 9 of those jurors could see it any differently.
Consumers picked DDR over RDRAM.
Of course the memory industry wanted to standardize on an industry standard, not a royalty burdened IP controlled by a single company. This has been great for consumers and competition. RDRAM was the opposite. It was rammed down consumers throats by Intel using its microprocessor dominance, forcing consumers to buy Rambus to use with Intel processors. Once consumers got an option of using DDR SDRAM with Intel CPUs, RDRAM was finished. Consumers picked DDR over RDRAM. That's what the jury found.
Serves them right. They wanted to force everyone to use RDRAM, it backfired.Consumers, and Intel for that matter, didn't really have a choice. Memory makers refused to produce RDRAM in volume thereby driving up its price significantly. Conversely, they colluded to flood the market with price-fixed DDR (again, go look at operating profits for Micron, Hynix, Infineon, et al at that time period - you'll see negative cash flows).
Intel's hand was forced to switch to DDR whether they wanted to or not. Lack of availability and pricing due to supply on RDRAM was hurting Intel's sales. In the simplest business sense Intel would have burned as a company had it NOT capitulated. Why else would Intel have to pay to get out of its licensing contract with Rambus? It wasn't a technical issue - that would have been breach.
The memory makers could have easily thrown their weight behind RDRAM, but they didn't because they wanted their extra percentage of profits. And where did that get them anyway? They still have to license patents for DDR - from guess who?
Collusion, IMO, with Intel to force memory manufacturers to adopt RDRAM.You keep on bouncing from one topic to another. At debate was where did Rambus commit anti-trust as you claimed, and why are the memory manufacturers "innocenet"?
Where was the illegal activity with Rambus?
Don't need to, they have been ruled innocent in court.And do you deny that the manufacturers commited something illegal?
All euro banks are getting blasted right now. UniCredit is in the front page news almost every day. UBS is cutting it's IB in half (by the former UniCredit head of IB). The French banks are getting hammered. The brits are hanging on but RBS is hurt. Massive downgrades coming.
At these borrowing costs Italy cannot survive with its current debt load, even at cheaper costs it cannot. Spain is horribly off with massive unemployment.
LOL@guy who thinks that Italy can "reform" its economy to stop cosy business interests. That's been going on for hundreds, if not thousands, of years while Italians just sit by and watch. Look how long they kept Bunga Bunga around, all for the lulz.
So, gonna throw my insight in here, as naive as it is:
AMD is RIDICULOUSLY underpriced. Last time we had macroeconomic bullshit, I piled on the AMD stock and it did all right.
The P/E is 3.93, they've got the best (arguably) GPU tech on the planet, they're the only other viable x86/APU manufacturer...expect to see this stock >$6.00 on any shred of good macroeconomic news. If earnings keeps doing well, you'll see the price correct itself so that P/E approaches the mean for semiconductors (>10).
Also any WHIFF of a buyout rumor is going to send this sucker soaring. A buyout would be money in the bank.
Full disclosure: I am long AMD and plan to augment my position within the next 72 hours
Disagree completely.
The Department of Justice, on Micron's request, went after Rambus. After wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money all the way to the Supreme Court, came up empty handed. Their Administrative Law Judge McGuire completely exonerated Rambus, stating "...the commission has taken an aggressive interpretation of rather weak evidence.":
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/02/rambusid.shtm
Rambus did not have "off-the-wall" accusations. In fact, the FTC case against them helped them uncover damning documents, including:
Managing Director of International Sales Linda Turner. Ms. Turner was responding to reports by her staff that Hynix was lowering its DDR pricing: "No problem! We want DDR to explode into the marketplace so have actually been requesting Infineon, Samsung, and Hynix to lower their DDR pricing to help it become a standard and drive Rambus away completely."
http://rambus.org/legal/menace.pdf
Willie Meyer, IBM, "Rambus is a deadly menace. One day all computers will have to be built like this, but hopefully without the royalties going to Rambus."
October 1999, an Intel manager explained to Intel's Peter MacWiliams, "so far all our discussions with Appleton (Micron CEO) have had zero benefit for us, we have gone out of our way to help them resolve Rambus contract issues and in return we have gotten nothing but deception. Micron is working very hard to do everything against RDRAM." (RX 1515 at 2)
Farhad Tabrizi, Hynix executive, in his June 2000 email to Park, Tabrizi stated: "I really want to ask you to let me go back to my old mode of RDRAM killing. I think we were very close to achieving our goal until you said we are absolutely committed to this baby."
From the FTC evidence: ''Jeff Mailloux, a senior Micron executive, President Tabrizi on February 20, 1998 that he had called a reporter and had told him that RDRAM was "at least 30% more expensive to manufacture than SDRAM. Mr. Mailloux urged Mr. Tabrizi to make a similar call to the reporter, warning Mr. Tabrizi not to forward his email to anyone and asked Mr. Tabrizi "Anyhow, please visit me if I end up in jail, but felt it was important and timely enough to get our message out there that 5% is not realistic in our opinion."
Hynix manager Andy Ha that Hynix "get together with Samsung and ask them to suggest to Micron to have a joint management meeting for RDRAM/DDR price control in the future."
Like I said before, I am completely baffled how 9 of those jurors could see it any differently.
LegendKiller or someone else should take this bait. I've done enough.So, gonna throw my insight in here, as naive as it is:
AMD is RIDICULOUSLY underpriced. Last time we had macroeconomic bullshit, I piled on the AMD stock and it did all right.
The P/E is 3.93, they've got the best (arguably) GPU tech on the planet, they're the only other viable x86/APU manufacturer...expect to see this stock >$6.00 on any shred of good macroeconomic news. If earnings keeps doing well, you'll see the price correct itself so that P/E approaches the mean for semiconductors (>10).
Also any WHIFF of a buyout rumor is going to send this sucker soaring. A buyout would be money in the bank.
Full disclosure: I am long AMD and plan to augment my position within the next 72 hours
LegendKiller or someone else should take this bait. I've done enough.
Someone really needs to find my posts and LegendKiller's about AMD in the numerous threads and post the links here.
I'm 100% long on stocks that I want to keep for awhile that were already heavily battered before the recent hits. Recent events made for nice buying opportunities and I keep accumulating cash so everytime they dip, I buy which brings down my average cost while accumulating tons of shares that pay dividends. The only stock I wish I got out of sooner was BAC..should have listened to Lothar since I was up nearly 40% at one point. I didn't lose much but it still put a fat dent on my overall performance. BAC was my only realized loss this year.
I'll play!
1) Not a single big name investor tracked by gurufocus.com owns AMD
2) In the past 10 years, they have had 1 year where they were free cash flow positive
3) 10 years ago they had 340 million shares. Today 691 million. Epic shareholder dilution. Yes, every year there were more shares. And not 1-2% shareholder dilution every year. We're talking 10% more shares every year. Epic, truly epic. They need to do that though when you don't actually generate cash.
4) no dividend. Not too shocking given what my 1 minute of research told me.
Did I miss anything?
Oh ya, to everyone else. Sorry for feeding the troll.