Now, if the lawyers for the self-plead guilty criminal price fixing memory cartel were truly working for their clients' best interest they would immediately tell them to settle at ant cost before the verdict, now that the jury is asking for all the evidence again that just proves Rambus' case.
But, I bet the cartel lawyers just want to take the criminal memory cartel for as many days' services as they can, so they will advise them to keep fighting.
So here is the post from the IV board. Where does it say MU will participate with Hynix or Infinion is raising prices on RDRAM that they never produced?
In fact it was MU that went to the DOJ and gave them the information.
A May 2000 email authored by Dell executive Kevin Kettler stated:
Dell has booked our products over the last year around the assumption that RDRAM prices would decline and close on SDRAM. This would help us create demand. . .. the memory vendors have shown no desire to drop prices, therefore we are reevaluating our strategies .... So the message to them is drop prices or we will continue to decrease OUT RDRAM forecasts and we will architect next generation systems around DDR. ... We will give the memory vendors till the end of May to reply to our request….
….. if they still have no desire to drop prices, we should push ahead rearchitechting chipsets around DDR. Exh. 55 (5/9/00 Kettler email);Exh. 236 (l/I5/03 Kettler Depo. at 133:6-134:1); Exh. 26522 (7117/08 Tabrizi Depo. at 219:13-25).
On June 8, 2000, after learning of Dell’s request, Mr.. Tabrizi begged for permission to “go back to my old mode of RDRAM killing” and further recommended that that Hynix reject the request in an effect to put Rambus out of business by “closing their income revenue” from RDRAM royalties. Exh.63 (Chung Dep.Exh 14); Ex (7/18/08 Tabrizi Depo at 217:17.218:4).
-Here the jury will certainly ask about this "old mode of RDRAM killing", an evidence prior to 2000."
Mr. Tabrizi knew that Hynix could not alone “kill RDRAM, so be communicated directly to Infineon and Micron seeking their support. On June 7, 2000, Tabrizi informed tops executives at Infineon and Micron that Hynix would not meet Dell’s target, and he asked them to join Hynix in sending a message to Dell to remove its head from its posterior with respect to RDRAM. (6/7/00 Tabrizi du-Preeze email discussing Dell’s price target and attaching an obscene photograph at HR905_435635).
Wow! This "cartel" was really successful. So successful that Micron dropped from $100.00/share to $2.00/share during this same alleged period. Doesn't a cartel increase profits for its members by dominating a market? Oh, I forgot....... in this case the only logic is that dictated by RMBS attorneys! RDRAM whithered away by natural market forces nothing else!
You must know that price fixing does not have to result in the price fixing ring leader's stock price outperforming in order for it to be deemed price fixing.
The price fixing did accomplish its true goal, however, of killing Rambus' superior Rdram as the next memory standard and instead having the cartel's inferior DDR solution chosen as the next standard.
You must also know that it is already case law in the U.S. that price fixing prices up, down, or even coordinating keeping them at a steady level are all price fixing violations, and the criminal memory cartel was convicted of price fixing memory in the identified time frame.
Greg, your a goofball. go read John Danforths most recent post on IV (do you even know who John Danforth is? Probably not). Basically confirms Rambus' contention that the Cartel is guilty of Price fixing. Look at the AH bid/ask. Bad news for the cartel. jt