Rambus jetzt kaufen! 01.10.03 bis $50 (Seite 620)

[Kashogi_de]

@ alle

Meiner Erinnerung nach hat Schumacher in dem 1. Verfahren in Virginia ausgesagt er habe noch nie von dem Willi Meyer Memo, in dem Rambus als "tödliche Bedrohung" http://rambus.org/legal/menace.pdfbezeichnet wird, gehört.
Nach Aussage von Willi Meyer, hat Schumacher das Memo erhalten
833. Meyer testified that in September 1992 he had prepared a presentation entitled
What Is Rambus?" (RX 321 at 1; CX 2089 at 66-67 (Meyer Infneon Trial Tr.)). Meyer
delivered this presentation to, among others, Dr. Schumacher, the current CEO ofInfneon.
(CX 2089 at 66-67 (Meyer, Infneon Trial Tr.

Weiss einer von Euch in welchem Transcript und wo das stand?
Ich möchte gerne deutsche Journalisten auf die miesen Tricks und Machenschaften des Herrn Dr. Schumacher aufmerksam machen. Das ganze hat bei Infineon System:
Steuergelder einsacken, dann den Firmensitz verlegen um Steuern zu sparen.
IP einsacken, dann nicht dafür zahlen wollen und mit ganz miesen Tricks sich aus der Affaire ziehen.

Die Zeit ist reif, dass von uns etwas "Öffentlichkeitsarbeit" geleistet wird. Die Verbindungen der Infineon Anwälte mit dem "ehrenwehrten" Richter Payne sind kein Zufall! Das muss endlich auch mal in die deutsche Presse.

Gruss Kashogi

[Kashogi_de]

Habe mich durch das FTC-Dokument komplett durchgearbeitet:


1. Rambustechnologie war zu jederzeit Technik der Wahl.

1052. The evidence shows that the four Rambus technologies were the technologies of
choice throughout the relevant time period and that a rational manufacturer or a rational JEDEC
would have selected the Rambus technologies. (Rapp, Tr. 9903).


2. Unsere seit langem gehegte Vermutung, dass RDRAM wegen illegaler Machenschaften nicht zum Standard wurde, ist bewiesen.

547. Tabrizi, in 1998, believed that Intel would not change course unless RDRAM failed
to obtain market penetration. (Tabrizi, Tr. 9082-83). He admitted that one way to cause
RDRAM to fail to obtain market acceptance was if the OEMs were convinced that even if
volumes went up, prices would not fall. (Tabrizi, Tr. 9083). If the OEMs were convinced of this
they would not adopt RDRAM. (Tabrizi, Tr. 9083).
553. Tabrizi admitted at trial that he had told Sang Park, then the President and Chief
Operating Offcer ofHyundai, that he wanted to "kill" Rambus and force RDRAM from the
market. (Tabrizi, Tr. 9105-07).
557. RDRAM failed to command significant market share despite the fact that it was
considered by some to be the "best solution." (RX 1762 at 5). As Peter MacWiliams of Intel put
it: .............. (in camera)

Zunächst mit Dumpingpreisen für DDR RDRAM vom Markt drängen und dann die Preise anziehen.

558. Subsequently, in a November 26 2001 email aMicron manager named Kathy
Radford described the efforts ofInfneon and Samsung to raise DDR prices, and stated that
Micron intended to try to raise its prices to all of the OEM customers. (RX 1922A at 1).
Radford then reported that "the consensus from all suppliers is that if Micron makes the move
all of them will do the same and make it stick." (RX 1922A at 1).



3. Rambus kann keine betrügerische Absicht unterstellt werden, da die Offenlegung von Patenten nur auf freiwilliger Basis beruhte.

767. JEDEC manuals also do not impose any mandatory disclosure duty. JEP 21- , in
effect when Rambus joined JEDEC, states that "JEDEC standards are adopted without regard to
whether or not their adoption may involve patents" and does not provide any further guidance
regarding intellectual property. (CX 205 at 20; see supra F. 606-32). JEP 21-1 refers to, but
does not impose, an obligation to disclose intellectual property. (CX 208 at 19 26; see supra
610-32).

Der Vorwurf der zielgerichteten Dokumentenvernichtung kann daran auch nichts ändern. McGuire geht darauf auch nicht weiter ein. Dieser Vorwurf ist auch der einzige Makel in der Urteilsbegründung, der nicht ausgeräumt wird, aber wohl keine weitere Bedeutung mehr hat:

983. In March 1998, there was "growing worry" within Rambus about ..email back-ups as
being discoverable information" in future litigation. (CX 1005 at 1).
984. Rambus executives decided to destroy emails archived on the company s backup
system after three months. (CX 1744A at 94 ("3 months might be ok"); CX 1744A at 104 (May
145
1998 management staff meeting: "Backups kept for three months ); CX 2114 at 137 (Karp,
Dep.
)).
986. Employees could stil maintain their own email archives for whatever time period
they desired. Employees were told to maintain their own archives if they wanted to maintain
email files for longer than three months. (CX 2102 at 80-81 (Karp Dep.); CX 1031).



4. JEDEC war sich zu jeder Zeit der Rambuspatente bewusst und hat Rambustechnik wissentlich einer Patentverletzung in den JEDEC-Standard integriert, weil sie dachten Rambuspatente basieren auf "prior art".

1519. Many JEDEC members were aware of Rambus s patent claims but considered
Rambus s patents a collection of prior art when considering the four technologies at issue. (F.
869-70).



Dies scheint mir die einzige Gefahr noch zu sein, die Rambus droht:
Annulierung der Patente wegen "prior art".
Alles Andere ist sogut wie vom Tisch. Auch Payne wird sich nicht durchsetzen können, spätestens in der Berufung ist alles paletti.


Mein Fazit:
Kann den Patenten keine "prior art" nachgewiesen werden, wird Rambus seinen Weg machen.


Gruss Kashogi

[Indiancigar]

wir haben gewonnen!!!LOL

http://www.lasvegassun.com/from.ed/1997/may/15/photos/P00001…

[Indiancigar]

schumacher,du Mistkerl,jetzt gehts dir an den Kragen!!!



Bei Infineon tickt eine Zeitbombe

Infineon-Aktionäre können sich am Donnerstag zwar über Kursgewinne beim Chip-Hersteller freuen. Doch neben einer noch immer schwächelnden Konjunktur droht eine weitere Gefahr: Die Patentklage durch den US-Konzern Rambus.


Rambus sitzt Infineon-Chef Ulrich Schumacher weiter im Nacken



Fast waren sie schon in Vergessenheit geraten: Die Milliardenforderungen des US-Unternehmens Rambus. Doch die langjährigen Anstrengungen von Rambus, Lizenzgebühren von den weltgrößten Chip-Herstellern einzutreiben, könnten sich womöglich bald auszahlen. Nach einer aktuellen Studie der Privatbank Merck, Finck & Co steigen die Chancen, dass Rambus solche Lizenzgebühren erhalten könnte.

Rambus behauptet, dass sich mehrere führende Speicherchip-Hersteller einer Technologie bedienen, die das US-Unternehmen durch Patente geschützt hat. Ein US-Richter, der mit der Klage von Rambus gegen die Chip-Produzenten befasst ist, hat sich nun zugunsten des US-Unternehmens geäußert. Rambus habe eine "legitime geschäftliche Begründung" für seine Klage gegen Infineon, Micron Technologies und den koreanischen Chip-Hersteller Hynix.


Erfolg in Europa, aber Fragezeichen in den USA
Sollte Rambus mit seiner Klage erfolgreich sein, könnte Infineon zumindest auf dem wichtigen US-Markt der Patentrechtsverletzung schuldig gesprochen werden. Die Lizenzgebühren, die Rambus seit mehr als drei Jahren einfordert, türmen sich derweil in Milliardenhöhe auf.

Infineon und seine Konkurrenten hatten noch vor wenigen Tagen einen Erfolg gegen Rambus in Europa verbucht. Mitte Februar hatte das Europäische Patentamt ein Patentrecht von Rambus für Speicherchip-Technologien in mehreren europäischen Märkten widerrufen. Einer entsprechenden Beschwerde von Infineon, Micron und Hynix war damit entsprochen worden.

Das Risiko, doch noch hohe Lizenzgebühren an Rambus zahlen zu müssen, ist aber in den USA nun gestiegen. So sehen es zumindest die Experten von Merck, Finck & Co. Infineon, so die Analysten in ihrer Studie, habe bislang keinerlei Rückstellungen für möglicherweise anstehende Zahlen gebildet. Ihre Einstufung der Infineon-Aktie will die Bank jetzt überprüfen.

[millegracia]

welch eine Ruhe heute im Rambus-Board.
Bei Infineon wird mehr über Rambus geschrieben;
das gibt mir zu denken ( im positiven Sinne).

[mike29]

Nehme alles zurück, gerade sind 10 hehandelt worden.

Sorry

[mike29]

Sehe ich das richtig, dass vorbörslich kein Handel
von RAMBUS Aktien statt finden ?
( www.Island.com )

[Toskka]

@ mike29

Calls (Leaps) sind längst im Depot

[mike29]

Ich denke der nächste wichtige Termin wird der Morgan Stanley`s Semiconductor und Systems Conference am 1 März, 2004 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time ( siehe #860 ), mit RAMBUS sein. Sollte bei uns gegen 01:45 am 2.3 sein.
Vorher kann man sich überlegen noch ein paar Calls zu besorgen.

[Indiancigar]

auf dem Yahoo-Board wurde ein altes Posting von unserem Freund P.T.Newell ausgegraben,erstklassig geschrieben,leider lag er damals total falsch,heute aber könnte es am Ende aufgehen...einer hat hier geschrieben,gut Ding will eben Weile haben,genaus das sage ich mir auch,leider SCHON SEIT 4 JAHREN!!!!!



My Thoughts On Valuing Rambus

More On The Great Memory War Of 2000

By Patrick T. Newell

June 28, 2000

The DRAM sector is a quite cyclical. Strong ups and downs modulate powerful underlying growth and contraction.

DataQuest, which has the best track record for forecasting in the industry, predicted in late 1999 that the DRAM market would be $29 billion in 2000 and $70 billion by 2002. Rambus Inc. RDRAM was predicted to have a 10% share in 2000 and a 50% share by 2002.

Actual DRAM sales are exceeding predictions. The most recent projections are for a $36 billion market in 2000 . That would translate to $3.6 billion RDRAM using the DataQuest 10% projection. The world’s largest memory maker and biggest producer of Rambus Inc. products, Samsung, now predicts a $38 billion market for Rambus Inc.’s RDRAM by 2002.

DRAM market $36 billion in 2000 (6/15/00)

http://www.ebnews.com/digest/story/OEG20000617S0002

Samsung estimates Rambus Inc. production, June 22, 2000

http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/news/2000/06/__10/20000623_1029…

The recent settlements by Toshiba and Hitachi suggest that Rambus Inc. will be able to charge royalty on all synchronous DRAM, whether RDRAM (Rambus DRAM) or not.

Valuing Rambus Inc.:

By 2001, Rambus Inc. will trade on 2002 earnings. According to indications in the press, the royalty Rambus Inc. collects is about 1.5% on RDRAM, 1.25% on SDRAM and higher on DDR. In addition, Rambus Inc. collects higher royalties on the DRAM controllers (3-5%, although these are cheaper). As a result, Rambus Inc. earns about 3% on DRAM sales, half from controllers. The latter half is often conveniently ignored by Rambus Inc. skeptics. Since the DRAM market is currently running 20% ahead of projections, I will up the 1999 projection of $70 billion in 2002 by 20%.


The Calculations
3% of $84 billion times 60% (40% tax rate) = $1.51 billion. Divide by 100 million shares and estimated 2002 earnings are $15.10/share after taxes. Contract fees from licenses adds perhaps $0.50/share. Total: $15.60/share in 2002.

If the legal victories hold up, Rambus Inc. will have a monopoly more widespread and more complete than Microsoft or Intel. What should a company earning $15.60/share after taxes in 2002 be worth in 2001? With high margins, high barriers to competition, and rapid growth, perhaps 40 times forward earnings, or $624 share.

Key variables:
(1) Growth rate of the DRAM market is notoriously hard to estimate.

(2) Non-RDRAM products like serializer/deserializer sold by PMC-Sierra are not counted in the above. These are currently small but fast growing markets.

(3) Recent legal victories might take months or even years to encompass entire industry. It is possible that established precedents could be overturned.

(4) The future market share of RDRAM is still controversial. Note that Samsung, the world’s most successful memory manufacturer, and DataQuest have more credibility to me than any other analyst.

A useful price estimate for Rambus Inc. requires estimating three factors:

(1) The probability that RMBS will take a large and growing percentage of the DRAM market – or else win the legal rights to the existing market (or both).

(2) The size of the DRAM market

(3) How fast the DRAM market is growing.

Simply because Rambus Inc. earnings grow 100 fold or more in a year does not make Rambus Inc. stock worth a forward P/E of 100 or 200 if that implies a price target higher than if Rambus Inc. owned the whole market. Suppose that the DRAM market was fixed at 1999’s $20 billion. Then the most RMBS could get from royalties would be 1.5% x $20 billion /100 million shares x 2 (for controllers) times 60% (taxes) = $3.60/share. Since earnings would be stagnant, forward P/E should be 10, so a price of about 10 x $3.60 or $36 would be appropriate (well below present value). Even if Rambus Inc. stock growth went from 0.5% to 50% (100 fold growth), no price higher than about $36 would be reasonable. The market always looks forward (or eventually does anyway) to see the future stagnation.

But in fact the DRAM market is growing fast; indeed faster than the most optimistic estimates. When a 1999 DataQuest estimate put the current year 2000 DRAM market at $29 billion and the 2002 market at $70 billion, many PC-centric observers couldn’t believe it. The PC industry is by far the largest user of DRAM, and it is growing only about 10-20% a year. DataQuest must be wrong many speculated.

Yet as of June 2000, it is clear DataQuest actually underestimated the strength of the growth So did the DRAM companies. Year 2000 DRAM Sales now looks to be $36 billion. In June Samsung estimated that the 2002 market will be about $76 billion, half RDRAM.

This dramatic upswing has a powerful effect on the worth of Rambus Inc.. If the DRAM industry were growing by the 15% growth rate of the PC industry, then a fair valuation of Rambus Inc. would use a forward P/E of about 15-30. If the market is growing at better than a 25% pace as appears to be the case, then a forward P/E of 25-50 is quite reasonable.

NOTE: Since Rambus Inc. collects royalties without doing the manufacturing, all these estimates assume Rambus Inc. employees do nothing except sit around making bonfires out of the cash that pours in. Others have commented on this. Rambus Inc. may find a better plan.

The key point is too understand why the DRAM market is growing so fast, and whether it is likely to continue.

The PC market has the biggest share of DRAM sales, but is probably the slowest growing segment. Here are some others.

(1) DSPs/small process control processors. Originally DSPs (Digital Signal Processors) were used for audio and video signals, and to perform certain mathematical algorithms fast. They still are, but there is an increasing trend for DSPs to show up everywhere. Think of them as a pint-sized CPU or chipset. An example of how they are spreading is Analog Devices recently convincing Whirlpool to use a DSP in blenders to save energy controlling the motors. The market is already large, and is growing by better than 30% a year. InStat and others have estimated that in the next 5-10 years this will be a bigger business for memory than the PC market. Tiny processors might appear in a hundred places – or a thousand – in your home controlling almost everything electronic. Sun Microsystems is hoping to break into this market with its new MAJC which uses Rambus Inc. technology. Note, however, that Sun Microsystems is not currently a major player in this market. TI, Motorola, Analog Devices and DSP (the company) are the major players. All currently use plain SDRAM. This is the biggest potential long term gold mine out there. If it continues to grow as predicted, and if Rambus Inc. wins royalties either through legal means or by the adoption of RDRAM, the win will be big.

(2) Internet consoles/game players/DVD. Rambus already is in PlayStation 2, predicted to dominate the market. Enough said.

(3) Fiber optic storage area networks. Brocade dominates this market, currently a few billion, but the market is expected to grow to tens of billions of dollars in the next few years (according to Briefing.com). Brocade’s Silkworm uses RDRAM.

(4) Network connectors. Specifically, the next generation of OC-192 may have to use Rambus, although IBM is hoping to make 200 MHz DDR work. This is a large, fast growing, but currently fragmented market. Rambus Inc. already has a small stake through companies like Vitesse, SwitchCore and PixelFusion. Other companies are still using made to order SRAM (static RAM) parts which cost 10 times what RDRAM does. Rambus Inc. is also hoping to make an impact through its new QRSL (Quad Rambus Signal Logic).

Short term, the biggest driver of Rambus Inc. profits will be the Willamette and/or settlements with SDRAM producers. But PC sales alone could never make Rambus Inc. the next Cisco or Microsoft. For Rambus Inc. to be the stock of the decade, instead of just a stock that was undervalued at the start of 2000, DRAM usage will have to continue to spread far beyond the PC. Fortunately for the company and its shareholders, that appears to be happening at a pace faster than the most optimistic estimates.
Until next time,

Patrick T. Newell