And within that two years, you also held and traded MU. Just don't anymore. (I remember all the 97% discussion) You're only here now to bash the MU stock.
Might get em going but realize any deal struck wouldn't get completed/materialize for 6 months to a year. By that time MU's well underway producting 3D NAND, 20Nm and the PC market will also be helping us by then.
The other thing no one mentions is MU's Idaho based blue blooded apple American pride. There's no reason to sell, let alone to China! This is why I say there is something more going on between China and the US Govt on this. China probes Co's now and then to practice and get better at their stealing strategies...
z27, Good theory. Let's carry this out further. I haven't investigated Tsinghua, what does the co do? And how would this work? Tsinghua buys MU, then INTC buys (takes over) the rest of Tsinghua?
If you're implying a merger with INTC, I don't see it happening and not sure it would be better for MU shareholders share price. INTC isn't interested in the DRAM business. The INTC share price is a slow mover and has challenges of it's own. Although I wouldn't mind, or prefer owning INTC at this juncture, I don't see adding MU accelerating a combined sp rise.
I think China is really up to something much bigger than just MU and INTC. Wish someone knew what...
Surprised no one's picked up on this Topic yet. From pt of view it's the only thing to make of this ridiculously low buyout offer. I think China's playing with MU's business (they can just steal it like everything else they do) and playing with the US government. I wonder how often China does this, testing the waters with our Govt?
One of Bloomberg's articles this morning claims 41% of MU's revenue comes from China. So what's the implied threat here? Sell out on the cheap to China or lose their business? (nevermind this buyout will never happen).
"Micron will have to tread carefully in negotiations. Tsinghua is state-backed and China is the world’s largest market for semiconductors. Micron got 41 percent of its revenue last year from the country."
Sad but truee, but the street shareholders are a minority. The insider and institutional shareholders rule any vote. So, we better hope MU isn't even considering anything south of $35...
"Micron (NASDAQ:MU) sells memory chips: DRAM chips and NAND chips. The latter type of chips will replace hard disks soon. As a matter of fact, the next computer I will buy will be one without a hard disk. Such computers are faster, more reliable and use less power. Such a replacement would already make sense for me. However, I usually wait as long as possible to replace my laptop, as it takes time to buy and install a new one. But apart from these non-financial switching costs, replacing your hard disk PC or laptop with one with solid-state memory makes sense already. Imagine everyone replacing his or her hard disk in the next couple of years!
Of course, I could just swap the hard disk in my old laptop with new solid-state memory. Many people have done that already. That would be the cheapest solution for me. But why would I invest my time to end up with the same old and slow processor? Because of these hidden switching costs, many people will replace their laptop or desktop instead of just the hard disk. These new computers will need new DRAM as well. As a result, the demand for Micron's other product, DRAM, will surge.
So Micron produces disruptive products that will replace all hard disks: NAND chips. "
The rhetoric you ran on during your 2014 campaign re MU's a lousy stock just turned out to be true for 2015. Much of this was not logical per Co and media news put out to the public. Most if this was due to surprises from Apple and Samsung, slow PC sales and slow delivery schedule for 2N and 3D NAND. All temporary things. Your thesis/campaign promise the PC is dead and MU in a dying industry will come to pass.
Agree but for Developed countries only. And much of the world is still developing. Serious computing and business computing will grow in those countries...
You're starting to cross the line arguing for the sake of arguing. Whatever I wrote, you know what I meant. Time to pack it in. Your getting close to Ignore again. Of course that doesn't mean I'll stop correcting you at will...
So you're an accountant type and Co executive. I hardly see how that qualifies you as an IT expert experienced doing serious computing. Just the title acct exec brings to mind the big shot that can't tie his own shoes without calling someone.
You compare INTC and MU with "Blackberry"!!!!!!!! Apples to oranges.
Once again, serious computing, functions, applications, etc are not going to be replaced by your "IOT".
Well, if you understand his point on BC then you are either contradicting your own argument or have a circular argument. Call it what you will but BC requires a 'robust' machine, decent size keyboard and screen.
I'm sure that this, "server business is starting to show cracks" is just the industry transforming into cloud based computing. Will take time. But servers are not going away and server stocks like MU will continue to be be competitive and leaders eventually.
You put the nail right on the head, "Nothing logical has worked out". That's been the MU story all year long. Being bright as an 'investor', or not bright, has had little to do with it...