Politics | RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Katz R Us who wrote (6956)1/10/1999 7:55:00 PM
From: Jonas   of 14464
 
Hi Katz!

If You're looking for less than 25 words...skip this

Here a couple more links should help to warm up...(most
have already been posted elsewhere)

1. The RAMBUS Conspiracy
realworldtech.com 

" In fact, many experts seem to agree that for uniprocessor,
single user environments,Rambus technology will provide
absolutely no benefits whatever! Despite this, consumers will
be paying a very hefty price for the privilege of using it."

-> The problem with ESDRAM is obviously that they are way behind
in the densities being offered...they're also behind on the
manufacturing process which "I think" means that the
variable manuf cost is relatively high...the Siemens connection
was supposed to address this...

2. 16M DRAM Exodus Sparks Price Surge
sumnet.com 

-> this could benefit rmtr

3. Rambus Loses High-End Designs To Memory Rival
sumnet.com 

-> while it's quiet on the SLDRAM-front activity is
gearing up on the DDR front...now there were EDDR
"plans" but the company has not indicated how any
of it's plans are progressing...

4. IBM website - 16 MB ESDRAM
chips.ibm.com 
chips.ibm.com 

-> finally there but with a 6+/- month delay...

5. New Micron chips may help rivals be more competitive with Intel
micron.com 

" The 133-MHz SDRAMs are almost a natural result as memory firms shrink to ever smaller feature sizes. Just as the shift to quarter-micron design rules almost automatically yielded DRAMs with 100-MHz speed, the shrink to 0.21 and 0.22 micron generation boosted speed to 133-MHz."

-> ESDRAM achieves 133MHz on .35 process (I believe)

ebnews.com 

-> there'll definitely be a 133Mhz platform for ESDRAM...that's +ve
unless their higher density chips come out too late again...

6. Toshiba-Fujitsu Ink Deal On 1-Gigabit DRAM
sumnet.com 
Toshiba, Fujitsu unite to develop 0.13micro recipe --
DRAM players find new allies for 1-Gbit
techweb.com 

-> wonder if anybody knows whether many/any of rmtr's FRAM
patents are material-independent? Would hope that FRAM
partner's research also involves more projects for
rmtr...

7.Sour memories today, sweet success tomorrow?
techweb.com 

" At the Electronica show here last week, Siemens showed its first 1-Gbit DRAM,claiming that at 390 mm2 and with a data rate of 400 Mbits/s per pin, it was the smallest die and fastest example of such a part. The synchronous DRAM is manufactured in 0.18-micron CMOS process technology and offers double-data-rate DDR) functionality, the key to its speed."

-> if Siemens know-how is applied to ESDRAM in higher density would
have thought that to be a fantastic market opportunity for both rmtr &
Siemens...and still have faint hopes of Siemens taking the place
of STM...and Oppenheimer coming up with a good solution...

Re financing

Some may want to check out the PARS thread, especially Mr Mohr,
- an analyst, Omer Shvili also participates there - the relevance
here is that in contrast to rmtr, PARS "well in advance" of
actually requiring any funds, secured for itself a creditline based
on convertible preferred stock...and they now have time to find a strategic partner and/or arrange a more favorable financing arrangement...Now that's what I call planning ahead.... - Of course, it still remains to be seen what happens, but the point is that a potential PARS shorter runs the risk of a +ve development...

Here's a good starting point...
Message 6838377

Jonas



Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Jonas who wrote (6960)1/10/1999 8:23:00 PM
From: Gordon Quickstad   of 14464
 
Excellent research, Jonas. I'm still very long and hopeful that this company will start hitting on both of it's cylinders. It's up to the salespeople and engineering support staff, mostly, now to get these products going. I thought we might have heard a follow-on press release regarding the new "fatigueless" materials they developed by now.

Wouldn't it be great if we could see 3 favorable developments in this quarter (I know I'm dreaming) - 256K fram, ESDRAM density, and "fatigueless" fram products.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: Gordon Quickstad who wrote (6961)1/11/1999 4:49:00 PM
From: David C. Burns   of 14464
 
Rumblings from inside Intel??

Message 7211282

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Gordon Quickstad who wrote (6961)1/12/1999 7:51:00 PM
From: Adolf E. Fullgrabe   of 14464
 
From SEC pre 14A filed today. Need I say more. VOTE NO.

RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

March 15, 1999


NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Special Meeting of the Stockholders (the
"Special Meeting") of Ramtron International Corporation, a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), will be held on March 15, 1999, at 2:00 p.m.,
Mountain Standard Time, at the principal office of the Company, located at
1850 Ramtron Drive, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80921, for the following
purpose, as more fully described in the attached Proxy Statement:

To approve a series of amendments to the Company's Certificate of
Incorporation, as amended, to effect, at any time prior to January 1, 2000,
a reverse stock split of the Company's Common Stock whereby each 1.5, 2, 2.5,
3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, and 5 shares would be combined, converted and changed into one
share of Common Stock, with the effectiveness of one of such amendments and
the abandonment of the other amendments, or the abandonment of all amendments,
to be determined by the Board of Directors.

Only record holders of Common Stock at the close of business on February 3,
1999 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Special Meeting and at any
adjournment or adjournments thereof.

All stockholders are cordially invited to attend the Special Meeting in
person. Whether or not you expect to attend the Special Meeting in person, in
order to ensure your representation at the Special Meeting, please mark, sign,
date and return the enclosed proxy card as promptly as possible in the
postage-prepaid envelope enclosed for that purpose. Any stockholder attending
the Special Meeting may vote in person even if such stockholder has returned a
proxy.

By Order of the Board of Directors


---------------------------------
Richard L. Mohr
Secretary
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Adolf E. Fullgrabe who wrote (6963)1/12/1999 9:47:00 PM
From: Gutterball   of 14464
 
Well, I guess we know the game plan. They want to turn my 500 shrs into 100 and vote me out of office.

I wish we had some news on ESDRAM to go along with it, now that Rambus is getting its upcomings.

Personally, I'm not buying more RMTR until after the reverse. Glad I nibbled at RCOM rather RMTR last week.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Adolf E. Fullgrabe who wrote (6963)1/13/1999 1:59:00 AM
From: Tom Caruthers   of 14464
 
Something tells me that there is more here than meets the eye.

There is no reason to do a reverse split now unless it addresses/removes the problem of the preferred shares...otherwise, this is a bonehead move if I have ever seen one and ranks right up there with the convertible preferreds. Oppenheimer...you better have something up your sleeve because if what we see at face value is all there is, you don't deserve a damn penny....not even the paper my RMTR stock is printed on. And management....if you are trying to screw us all over a second time...I am trying not to think evil thoughts.

Let's get clarification before jumping to conclusions. This must be part of a larger plan....I hope.

Tom

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Tom Caruthers who wrote (6965)1/13/1999 2:02:00 AM
From: Matt Meagh   of 14464
 
Someone here mentioned that RMTR would be de-listed if they could not
maintain a $1.00/share price. Perhaps the reverse is to prevent
delisting?

Matt

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Matt Meagh who wrote (6966)1/13/1999 2:11:00 AM
From: Tom Caruthers   of 14464
 
Hi Matt,

Solving the problem with the preferreds will bring us over a dollar easily and solve the problem of delisting. Not this reverse split thing. This reverse split is ludicrous because we all know that reverse splits for ailing companies just means the stock goes back to what it was pre-split and common shareholders are then in for a world of hurt. Besides...why do the reverse split now....we should allow the preferreds to convert their shares.

If your stock languishes under $1...you don't get delisted automatically...you get a hearing where you present your case and request an extension. That's why there are so many sub $1 companies out there on the Nasdaq. Anyway, I hope that's not why they are doing this reverse split.

Good luck, Matt...

Tom

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Tom Caruthers who wrote (6965)1/13/1999 11:10:00 AM
From: Peace   of 14464
 
Tom,

I think the reverse split is being proposed to solve the conversion problem as well as to prop the price up to keep nasdaq listing. The reverse split will free up shares to complete the coversion. The other way to complete the conversion is to increase the number of authorized share. That however will keep the price depressed and lead to eventual delisiting. The basic question is still the same, whether to support the coversion or not.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Gordon Quickstad who wrote (6961)1/13/1999 4:01:00 PM
From: Jonas   of 14464
 
Warning: Long post...

Hi Gordon,
thanks for the flattery - ...so much for +ve developments...so far at least :(

Following post is very long, but hopefully there are a couple of
inspiring points


Re FRAM Sales & Engineering Staff

As far as the salespeople are concerned they can only sell what's available... and where are Fujitsu's, Hitachi's etc. FRAMs?

The Samsung ramp alone is not going make rmtr rich as they don't
have a call on production...I also find it irritating that Samsung
having taken out a license so late is seemingly ahead of Hitachi &
Fujitsu in commercialization....

Have also had the horrible thought that ATMI will eventually turn
out to be what I expected of rmtr...and I'm underweight this
one...maybe the market will allow me in at a good level...

Anyway as far as the engineering staff is concerned, as outstanding
as their their achievements to date are (especially considering the
limited resources the co has - wonder what they could do if they had
twice the no. of engineering staff...), if partners are so slow
there's nothing rmtr can do...

As far as fatigue-free FRAM is concerned, would have hoped this to increase interest by potential licensees... but believe rmtr already
indicated it would be a while before their research is transformed
into the marketplace... have always thought that FRAM is a distant
technology and then there's been one delay after another...But if
rmtr's website is any indication a look at the list of distributors
might perhaps indicate that rmtr has made preparations for increased
sales...(just giving a THIN thread to those who badly want to be
optimistic)

Re ESDRAM

IMO the ESDRAM potential is still far greater near-term and would
also see some benefits for potential partners here...

As recent articles & tech reviews indicate DRDRAM is truly
revolutionary in terms of of resources dedicated to its
commercialization - but not necessarily in terms of
performance...as the increase in DDR efforts illustrates

Re DRDRAM - OEM Support

e.g. Michael Dell favors Rambus
Message 7206452

The general endorsement of RAMBS by the likes of AMD, CPQ, DELL etc.
IMO seems to be based on expectations of realistic commercial
availability rather than technical merit...if better alternatives were
available from many sources, these should at the very least gain
significant (< that's all I'm saying on RMBS & and their management
is superb IMO - but I didn't get them - this should be an interesting
topic if I were to call on a shrink's service - even for the shrink)


RE DRAM Performance

Interesting post on RMBS thread
Message 7186352

" Module suppliers admit that the design constraints implicit in the 800-MHz memory-bus architecture are formidable. "The PC board is a
big challenge," Smart Modular's Johnston said. "Their tolerances are
tighter, and their vias are smaller. So, as the volume picks up, the
PCB guys are going to have to get a little bit better at what they're
doing in general."

-> Mr Ignoranti actually has a hunch that these engineering advances
originally spurred/accelerated by the DRDRAM ramp could conceivably
be applied to competing DRAM technologies too resulting in further
increased non-DRDRAM performance...

RE - Foundry Motivation for supporting alternative DRAM technologies

Besides the technical merits of all DRAM develpment alternatives, a
key motive for any foundry would according to Mr Ignoranti also be
to reduce dependency on rmbs, for instance in terms of information
flow which might not be the same for e.g Micron (likely to have all
they need and another competitive foundry. Perhaps another risk for
a DRAM manufacturer is falling behind in the learning curve vs. a
competitor

-> so pushing alternatives ALONGSIDE DRDRAM might also be a strategy for reducing business risk...So all I'm saying here is that fabs
should have interest in non-DRDRAM irrespective of technological
merits...

This should spark a few ideas

From Zahir's Electronic Newsletter November '98 issue
zen-news.com 

How to slow down your competitor:

I have no way of verifying this, but Martin Lefebvre (Pres. Of Cadabra
Design) related this interesting anecdote. Way back when there was a shortage of fab capacity (like two years ago), a PC manufacturer
(we'll call it D), purposely sent a totally useless design to a
foundry that it knew its competitor (we'll call it C) was using. The
intent was to tie up fab resources so that C wouldn't be able to get
enough chips built. D was able to increase its market share because C
couldn't deliver enough systems.

-> supports the dependency argument above...

Zahir's Electronic Newsletter November '98 issue

+ Intel demos Rambus based PC; IBM & SGI insist on DDR for servers
1999 should be a pretty good year for Rambus. Intel demonstrated a
Windows based PC using a Rambus Direct RDRAM memory module. Intel
didn't identify any of the components used in the demo system,
however, Intel is rumored to be sampling its Camino chipset that
supports RDRAMs.

Just in case DRAM manufacturers need an incentive to
build RDRAMs, Rambus is offering warrants for 400,000 shares of its
stock priced at $10/share (the stock is trading at around $95). The
catch - only Direct RDRAM partners who meet certain product
qualifications and volume production targets are eligible to receive
the warrants. (EETimes, Nov. 23, 1998, EBN Dec. 18, 1998)

-> With all of intc's behind-the-scenes muscle, Rambus still has to
hand out carrots...


Meanwhile, another high speed DRAM technology is picking up steam - 11
DRAM manufacturers announced support of a JEDEC standard for
Double-Data DRAM (DDR). The current spec calls for clock speeds of
133 MHz at 2.5 V and data read out on the rising and falling clock
edges - net result is 266 Mbits/sec/pin data transfer. IBM
Microelectronics is sampling 256 Mbit DDR DRAMs, with volume shipments
due in mid-1999. IBM and SGI have publicly announced they will use
DDRs in their high end servers. Vendors are not yet convinced that
Rambus DDRAMs can scale to gigabyte memory banks commonly used in
servers. (http://www.ebnonline.com/story/OEG19981204S0027)

RE FINANCIAL MESS

Haven't yet digested the latest filing...find it simply annoying to
see current efforts probably resulting at letting the DARKIES convert
all their preferred stock...what good is it for current shareholders
if the stocks through "finance games" beeing played by the big boys
remains listed.

If a big co. e.g. Siemens (yeah, I know, I'm always using the same
straw)were to be offered and accepts new preferred in a deal similar to that of Rambus (only with no strings attached), then I could at least try to be optimistic...even with a reverse split and further
dilution...rmtr says they want "flexibility" (to dilute further?) and that they're looking at alternatives but not which alternatives are
being considered... Does management want investors to fasten their seatbelts for the next ride?

IMO There's is a faint chance of some +ve development but I'm not
willing to gamble on it. Unfortunately I haven't sold (even when the
"would I buy now again" test failed at 3ish)and I'm just going to
hold...not going to get any more until there's firm evidence of
commercial progress...

Jonas

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.