Fri, Jul 11, 2014, 10:53 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Rambus Inc. Message Board

  • tech_hound tech_hound Aug 26, 2010 3:43 PM Flag

    Why does Samsung need a Put?

    Could Sharon or Dippy please explain why Samsung needed a Put if Samsung is developing a bunch of great products using XDR? Isn't Samsung a believer in Rambus's managment?

    I think Samsung management is still laughing at the settlement deal they got from Mr Transformation.

    Pandesic was certainly transformed

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • DumBest:

      You have failed once again to answer the obvious question. Even if Rambus achieves $160 million from Samsung, it will do little if anything for the pps. Further, with the world economy slowing down and Samsung and Hynix coming off record beating quarters, the next year or so looks grim as there will likely be a slowing world-wide economy if not a double dip recession. So forget $160 million, it won't happen any time soon.

      When will Rambus reach $500 million? Certainly and absolutely NOT within a year as Harold predicted. This is more like a 5 year plan.

      -Nvidia will not settle. They will take it to the hilt. Years to finally resolve
      -IBM, ditto. Years in the courts and cash drains
      -AT is a wet dream. The Cartel will delay this mess into oblivion. Due to a small TAM and SOL, damage recovery is limited at Best, DumBest, to a couple measly $100 million which Rambut won't see for years if not decades.
      -CA on spoliation won't happen until mid-2011. But there will be a remand to Robinson and any favorable ruling is neutered as she finds yet another way to sc.rew Rambut.
      -As a result of Robinson, Whyte won't start the other cases and their start is years away. Rambut won't see any money from the escrow account for years if not decades
      -MOU with Samdung? If they were really working with Rambut on anything big, we would have heard about it already. If they do something together, it will affect a very niche high-end and very small market. The MOU has no teeth and Samdung will let it die a slow death. Nothing will come of it. Rambut supposedly has the technology. Smartphones are the way to go......but apparently Samdung ain't gonna use the LED/XDR Rambut combo anytime soon. If they were to use it, they would have announced something by now.

      Continued litigation. Continued cash drain. Continued no licenses of any market moving significance. Continued lack of settlements. Continued miniscule revenues. Continued very small margins. Continued dilution. Continued bad management.

      So, DumBest, what PE have you calculated today math genius? What financial scenario have you come up with? The last time you tried doing so, I pulled down your pants and gave you a good public spanking.

      Want it again? Well, let's see what your math wizardy shows. We are all waiting, big mouth or are you buk buk buk baaaaack, baaaack again? Enjoy your chicken sandwiches and Rambut's trip to the low teens. Rambut's future is real grim, that is why Bold the DODO has flown the coop. Even he is smarter than you dummy.

    • -

      tech_hound, you are asking the wrong people.

      You need to ask Samsung Electronics why they asked for a put, which Rambus gracious granted them.

      So how's your Korean?

      There are a number of reasons why Samsung might have wanted a put, however.

      1. Partial take-over. Let's say Rambus has a partial takeover, with the buyer taking 51% ownership in Rambus. Samsung might not want to be a 9% owner if Rambus has a change in ownership. So to protect their investment, they asked for a put, to have the company repurchase their 9%.

      2. Financial difficulties of Samsung. Let's say Samsung is banned from the U.S. (as the "N" company almost was) or enters bankruptcy. Having a put allows the hapless company to easily and quickly liquidate their ownerhip in Rambus.

      Again, you really need to ask your question of Samsung. Hope that helps tech_hound.



      -

      • 2 Replies to bestnhighest.wins
      • Best:

        I have to hand it to you. Your responses are devastatingly simplistic, naive and egregiously stupid.

        Tech Hound raises a very intelligent point. My question would be why Samsung did not ask to be protected 100%????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

      • the kindly Mr. Tate, who advised them to sell puts on Ramscam before.

        Since Ramscam is financing its lawsuit frenzy by shorting their own stock, why shouldn't Samsung get some of the action?

        Let's see: "800MM" max less 200MM for the sum of the 100MM ownership stake taken in this tin lawsuit on roller skates plus the value of the covered call leaves about 510MM over the next five years with potential discount of 20%. Since Ramscam's latest "kitchen sink" patent families aren't passing the sniff test so well, at least 30% downside should be a conservative estimate on the remainder. That leaves about 400MM max over the next five years on the grand expectation that "fact finder Ron" is fully upheld and there is no indication that anything related to a scheme to morph claims originally filed against a worthless and abandoned written description of a "RamBus" "invention" while deceptively hiding the actual mode of operation of RDRAM devices and their associated Rambus Access Controllers so that a litigation campaign to attack implementers and users of the JEDEC standard DRAM interface specifications they participated in the development of.

        At the "partnership rate", Ramscam can probably expect about 20MM a quarter. That should be pin money for the vulture lawyers picking at their corpse.

    • I see Dippy and Sharon don't want to answer.

      No surprise.

 
RMBS
14.02-0.10(-0.71%)Jul 11 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Potbelly Corporation
NasdaqGSFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
ACI Worldwide, Inc.
NasdaqGSFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
MGIC Investment Corp.
NYSEFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:01 PM EDT