Lots of litigation news here - also confirms that Micron did indeed get the squeal deal. The best part is that the defendants in the antitrust case have been ordered to turn over to Rambus documents that they have turned over to the DOJ (if I read that correctly)

Rambus Announces Developments in Patent and Antitrust Cases
Monday April 25, 8:02 am ET
Judge in Rambus Antitrust Case Rejects Defendants' Demurrer, Case to Proceed to Discovery
Micron and Hynix Patent Cases Also Move Forward


LOS ALTOS, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 25, 2005--Rambus Inc. (Nasdaq:RMBS - News) today announced developments last week in three separate litigation matters.
ADVERTISEMENT


First, in an antitrust case brought last year by Rambus against several DRAM manufacturers, the California Superior Court for the City and County of San Francisco last Friday overruled a demurrer that had been jointly filed by defendants seeking dismissal of the case. The case is against Hynix, Micron, several of their subsidiaries and affiliates, and a number of unnamed co-conspirators. It alleges a continuing conspiracy beginning in the mid-to-late 1990s in which the defendant DRAM manufacturers conspired illegally, among other things, to share cost and pricing data and eliminate Rambus's RDRAM memory design from the market. Last week the United States Department of Justice announced that Hynix has agreed to plead guilty to a criminal conspiracy with other DRAM companies to fix prices during 1999-2002. The Justice Department also recently confirmed that Micron had reached an "amnesty" deal with the Department by cooperating in its investigation of the conspiracy.

In other proceedings in the Rambus antitrust case, the San Francisco court resolved certain issues relating to a draft protective order, directed the parties to meet and confer about other issues relating to that order, and ordered defendants to produce to Rambus all documents they had previously produced to the Department of Justice within 30 days from the entry of that protective order. The San Francisco court also set a further status conference on May 20, 2005 to consider, among other things, the order and timing of further discovery in that case and the indication of defendant Hynix that it will seek to compel arbitration in South Korea of the claims against it pursuant, it says, to the terms of the 1996 Rambus-Hynix RDRAM license.

In the Hynix v. Rambus patent case in the Northern District of California, Judge Ronald Whyte has tentatively denied Hynix's motion to dismiss the case, which had been based on the doctrine of collateral estoppel and on certain rulings and statements by another court. Oral arguments on this motion were held this past Friday in San Jose and the court thereafter took the issue under submission. No ruling has yet been issued on the motion.

In other proceedings in that case, the federal court in San Jose heard discussion of Rambus's efforts to restore newly-discovered data from computer back up tapes, directed the parties to work out procedures for production of responsive documents found on those tapes, directed the parties to advise the court on Wednesday, April 27, 2005, of any issues that the parties could not resolve, and set a May 20, 2005 status conference to discuss, among other things, the setting of new pretrial and trial dates.

In a third case, the patent case against Micron now pending in the District of Delaware, the Delaware court last week denied a motion by Micron seeking to schedule an early hearing on its spoliation allegations against Rambus and seeking to stay the rest of the case. Instead, the Delaware court suspended the current trial and pre-trial schedule in Delaware, consistent with one of the suggestions offered by Rambus, and directed that all discovery should continue. The Court also set a further status conference roughly 90 days out to, among other things, review progress in the Hynix case in California. The court also indicated that it would defer until the next status conference its consideration of a Rambus motion seeking leave to bring new patent cases against Micron, including its request to add Micron to the DDR2 case currently pending in California against multiple DRAM companies.

"We take very seriously the complexities and difficulties of these cases, and we continue to direct significant resources to the issues surrounding our newly discovered potential evidence," said John Danforth, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus. "Overall, we are pleased with the events of last week and with the progress that we think they represent. We intend to continue to work though the complexities of these cases as expeditiously as we can - with the same goal as always, to be fairly compensated for our innovations and to seek appropriate redress for illegal conduct that has harmed us in the past."

About Rambus Inc.

Rambus is one of the world's premier technology licensing companies specializing in the invention and design of high-speed chip interface. Since its founding in 1990, the company's innovations, breakthrough technologies and integration expertise have helped industry-leading chip and system companies solve their most challenging and complex I/O problems and bring their products to market. Rambus's interface solutions can be found in numerous computing, consumer, and communications products and applications. Rambus is headquartered in Los Altos, Calif., with regional offices in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Bangalore, India; Taipei, Taiwan; and Tokyo, Japan. Additional information is available at www.rambus.com.

RMBSLN

FTC

This is Deborah's best opportunity to let McGuire's decision stand and get this mess behind her. She does not have to accept responsibility for Muris' corruption. As isolated as they might be or think they are from the common person, at some point public perception has to weigh on their decisions. They can continue to support the convicted felons who brought the charges against Rambus; they can continue to ignore the fact that the "players" involved in this charade (Muris, Royall...) have moved on to lucrative positions at firms associated with Rambus' adversaries; or they can let this go and turn a new page.


Let's hope they make the right decision.

News...

Rambus Acquires Digital Core IP From GDA Technologies
Thursday April 21, 8:00 am ET
Digital Interface IP Complements Rambus's High-Speed Interface IP Products


LOS ALTOS, Calif. & SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 21, 2005--Rambus Inc. (Nasdaq:RMBS - News), one of the world's premier technology licensing companies specializing in high-speed chip interfaces, along with GDA Technologies, a leading Electronic Design Services (EDS) solution provider, today announced that Rambus has acquired digital core intellectual property (IP) assets from GDA Technologies.
ADVERTISEMENT


This multi-faceted deal provides Rambus with digital controller IP to complement its existing line of high-speed interface physical (PHY) layer products. This agreement enables Rambus to deliver complete physical and digital layer IP for high-speed interface designs. Specifically, Rambus is acquiring digital core IP compatible with PCI Express, Ethernet, SPI-4, USB and SATA protocols, as well as products that are currently in development and will be made available based on customer demand. Rambus will be extending offers to a number of GDA Technologies employees, both in San Jose, California and Bangalore, India that are affiliated with the design and development of these digital IP cores.

"By adding these IP cores from GDA to our existing line of high-speed interface technologies, we are very well positioned to provide a broad portfolio of easy to use, customer proven and tightly integrated solutions to our customer base," said Samir Patel, vice president of engineering at Rambus. "In addition, a team of digital IP developers in India and the U.S. will join Rambus. Prakash Bare, vice president of GDA's IP business unit, will also move to Rambus as general manager of the Digital IP business. This enables us to accelerate the expansion of our design center in Bangalore, India and gives us an additional ability to attract top engineering talent in that region."

As part of this agreement, GDA becomes a reseller of these digital controllers and will offer this IP along with its IP and IP-enabled services. Additionally, GDA may use the controllers in custom designs through a technology licensing agreement. GDA Technologies will continue to provide Electronic Design Services, Semiconductor IP, Verification IP and value-added IP-enabled services.

"This agreement enables us to focus and scale our business, while Rambus can focus on delivering a strong product roadmap of integrated controller and PHY solutions. The combination of Rambus's physical layer expertise and products with GDA's digital core IP provide chip designers a complete interface solution," said A.G. Karunakaran, President of GDA Technologies. "We are very excited to partner with a larger IP company that is focused on providing the industry with high-speed interface designs that solve its customers' challenges."


I wonder how much this is costing them. I expect to see similar deals over the next few months. If Rambus can buy enough patents related to specific technologies, "customers" will be forced to license. I expected this type of news soon after the convertible was completed. They didn't need the cash - I saw the reasoning as two-fold - buy intellectual property that enhances/complements their current patents and put some cash in the bank for a rainy day. One of the first lessons in corporate finance is to raise money at good rates when you can whether you need it or not.

This seems like pretty positive news...

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/050414/145217.html?.v=1


Press Release Source: Rambus Inc.


Rambus Signs Patent License Agreement With NEC Electronics
Thursday April 14, 8:00 am ET
Agreement Includes DDR2 Memory Controllers as Well as Future Rambus Innovations


LOS ALTOS, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 14, 2005--Rambus Inc. (Nasdaq:RMBS - News), one of the world's premier technology licensing companies specializing in high-speed chip interfaces, today announced it has signed a patent license agreement with NEC Electronics Corporation that allows the development and manufacture of memory controllers based on various Rambus innovations.
The agreement is for a five-year term, with the possibility of renewal or extension. The license's scope covers memory controllers compatible with SDR, DDR and DDR2 SDRAM as well as future memory controller innovations. Rambus will receive royalties on sales of licensed products.

"This agreement with one of the world's leading chip providers showcases the value of our patent portfolio," said Harold Hughes, chief executive officer at Rambus. "We have enjoyed a long and lasting relationship with NEC Electronics and look forward to the continued collaboration with their engineering teams to help bring new and advanced products to the market."

Since its founding in 1990, Rambus has focused on advancing electronic system performance through innovations in logic and memory interfaces, controller architectures, and system design. The result is a broad portfolio of innovations and patents that enables semiconductor manufacturers and system designers to achieve ever-increasing levels of functionality and performance, to lower system costs, to mitigate risk with silicon-proven designs, and to reduce time to market. For more information on Rambus's patent portfolio, please visit www.rambus.com/products/innovationslicensing/.

I read the Rambus opposition to collateral estoppel last night

http://investor.rambus.com/downloads/2005-04-11%20Rambus%20Opposition%20to%20Hynix%20Motion%20to%20D...

and MHO is that the CE is DOA and that the SOBs at Hynix are SOL

But

WTFDIK

Rambus has found 164 backup tapes in a garage on its premises, many of
which may contain backups from the period between 1996 and 2000.

Judge Payne was right all along - Rambus is a bunch of fraudulent schemers. You can bet your bottom dollar that Tate et al. haven't misplaced any stock certificates in the "garage".
I have to agree with those suggesting that Rambus wouldn't have suddenly found these backup tapes and be providing them at the last minute if they weren't fairly confident that either there is nothing incriminating or, better yet, it proves what they've been claiming all along.

I wonder if Rambus is hiring the same guys to recover what's on these backup tapes as the guys who looked at Willie Meyer's hard drive?

Hi Threejack - good to see you posting. I was starting to believe my own sarcasm. As time goes on, my appreciation for this board grows. It has become torturous reading the Yahoo MB so I've been sticking exclusively to this board and TMF. Even TMF has its rats (pun intended).

Like most, I was a little disappointed with the terms of the settlement but I bought back in on the rationale that the biggest impediment to Rambus' future has been removed (i.e. - the Payne).

There is now a lot that can go right for Rambus. I'm still a little concerned about what happens next year with Intel (will there be a new contract signed or will Rambus be losing 10 million a quarter), but a few litigation wins and licensings and the Intel fear will subside.

It would be a nice boost to see ATI and NVDIA sign some XDR deals with Rambus and see Hynix and Micron cough up some back royalties.

The glass is looking half full again of my favorite Koolaid.

OT - Is anyone here following IDCC - they could be in for a serious windfall come the end of May.

There is little doubt that Sammie is on the verge of being indicted in the price-fixing investigation by the DOJ. They have set aside reserves and when the time is right, they will admit to their guilt and pay the fines just like Infineon did. The only reason that Infineon settled with Rambus is because of the AT suit and the information contained in the JRA documents - why else? They had them on the ropes with no signs that Rambus was ever going to get their day in court.

Rambus has left Sammie out of the AT suit for now but there is no reason their name can't be added at a later date. Samsung and Intel both agreed to pay Rambus for the same reason - they wanted to keep their competition on their toes. They wanted to fund the litigation machine that they hoped would expose the MMs and keep a lid on their ambitions. Neither company gave Rambus money because they thought it was the right thing to do. My guess is that Samsung earns more in interest on their cash equivalents in a day than they pay Rambus for an entire year. It was short money for Sammie to come to terms with Rambus and if Hynix or Micron or IFX were ever severely hamstrung due to the Rambus litigation, the strategy would have paid off in spades.

The question really is whether or not the IFX deal sets some sort of precedent. I tend to think it does not. McGuire said it does not. If Rambus wins against Hynix and the DOJ exposes Samsung - Samsung will be in no position to demand anything from Rambus. I believe that Samsung is as guilty as anyone of plotting against Rambus.

Even if Rambus did give a similar deal to Samsung, it's still better than what they're getting now - probably to the magnitude of 4 or 5 times better. Let's collect the fixed pittance on the pre-XDR memory flavors and move on. Let's focus those litigation dollars on controllers and XDR and Flexphase and Raser...


I hate this company but I can't look away.

PS is Threejack on holiday?

I think Threejack lost faith and sold his shares.

so will be interesting to see if the license renewal covers this technology.

Be interesting to see if they renew at all. For the first time in 4 years, I essentially have no position in this stock and yet I still feel compelled to read the boards and see what's going on. If a trial actually takes place this year, I'll be looking to take advantage otherwise I'll probably wait until 2006 to get back in.

Call it capitulation.

Big Bummer...

Richmond update
by: ownerofbusiness 03/01/05 06:08 pm
Msg: 746611 of 746630

The patent infringment suit is dismissed.

IFX's monopolization claim is ordered dismissed as moot.

The status of CA 17200 is to be discussed between the parties, but it is as clear as a bell that Judge Payne wants it to go to California and my personal belief is that Rambus and IFX will find a way to move it without prejudice to either party.

Written orders will follow from the Court (Payne).

I believe "Tin Whiskers" is another way of saying 5 O'clock shadow.

Best news and first confirmation I've seen that Cell uses Rambus technology - wonder what the royalty rate is:

Credit to tunescribe on Yahoo

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3469111

'Memory chipmaker Rambus (Quote, Chart) said IBM and partners will use its XDR memory and FlexIO processor bus interface hardware. The company said the memory and processor bus interfaces designed by Rambus account for 90 percent of the Cell processor signal pins, providing an unprecedented aggregate processor I/O bandwidth of approximately 100 gigabytes-per-second.'

Some of my bigger concerns include:

Whyte agreeing with Payne thus far that Rambus WAS anticipating litigation and should have instituted a hold 2 years before they did.

Whyte agreeing that Crisp is an unreliable witness.

Whyte allowing ACP to be pierced.

Payne throwing out the infringement claims leaving no infringement trial after two years of waiting.

Payne leaving the attempted monopolization charge intact (even though Infineon waived its right to this charge)

DDR2 and GDDR litigation being dragged down by the same BS above.

And most recently the fact that Rambus has NOT ONCE been mentioned as being integral or even associated with CELL.
Why isn't Rambus mgmt coming out and confirming its technology is present and where is the license agreement with IBM and how much are they or aren't they paying Rambus.

The fallback for owning Rambus has always been that even if they lose these infringement trials, at least they have the next generation technology.

All I'm seeing so far is no mention of Rambus in CELL, no licensees for XDR, and INTENSE competition for RASER.

I almost forgot - we also have the Intel agreement expiring and the loss of 40 million in annual revenue and we have Samsung mysteriously silent on licenising of DDR2.

An MIT EE.
I think I'm in love.

LOL

I would think that she ranks pretty high on the EE scale - the pickings are probably pretty slim in the field.

XDR™ Memory
Elpida Memory, Inc.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Toshiba Corporation


Seems pretty clear cut to me.

I can't imagine them wanting the money for anything but an acquisition. $250 million is more than enough to get them through the legal dramas even assuming cash flow from operations dried up. Their run rate as it is now is about 30 million a year - they have enough for 8 years.

They will announce an acquisition with a month is my guess. We'll see.

It was a block trade - a pre-arranged agreement between the company (my guess) and a broker. It hits the tape because it has to by law (change of beneficial ownership) but because it's a private transaction, it does not move the stock price.

Looks to me like Rambus bought the 75 million of stock they promised in one fell swoop...

"1 block trade premarket of 4,051,863 shares"

Take 4,051,863 shares and multiply by last night's closing price of 18.51 and you get

74,999,984.13 or 75 million which is the exact amount of stock that Rambus said it would repurchase.

Coincidence?

If the date is right, a very big hearing this Friday...

Hearing this Friday on Spoilation
by: fneww
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Buy 01/26/05 09:44 pm
Msg: 733130 of 733176

On October 1, 2004, Hynix filed a motion to dismiss our patent claims as a default judgment based on the findings of spoliation that had been entered by the trial court in the Infineon case in Virginia. The court has delayed judgment on Hynix’s motion to dismiss, but ordered us to submit to the court for in camera review the privileged documents we were ordered to produce to Infineon in the Virginia court. Based on its review of those documents, the court stated on December 16, 2004, that it was tentatively going to order that Hynix had shown a prima facie case of spoliation, but, unlike the holding in the Infineon case in Virginia, that we were entitled to be heard on whether or not this evidence amounted to a crime or fraud sufficient to warrant a piercing of the attorney-client privilege. We submitted our brief for in camera review on January 14, 2005. Hynix’s opposition brief was filed on January 25, 2005, and a hearing is scheduled for January 28, 2005. At the hearing, it is expected that the court will determine what, if any, additional discovery is warranted and will set a further briefing schedule for Hynix’s motion to dismiss and for sanctions.



This is so crucial in my mind because it is an opportunity to further balance the Payne - if Whyte agrees with Rambus and finds that the document desctruction does not rise to the level of a crime and that there was no fraud committed, then Payne will continue to look foolish/biased with his ruling to pierce ACP.

If Whyte agrees with Payne, I might have to get off the bus. (at least for a while)

The smartest thing they could do with that money is buy themselves an entire law firm.

They don't need the money for "working capital" - they don't have any working capital and they are cash flow positive.

I've already seen the dire predictions of anticipated lost revenue from Intel or some such, but I anticipate they've identified a private or public company that they would like to purchase that will add to their patent portfolio or other capabilities.

They have over 137 million in cash and another 126 million in long term investments so they definitely don't need the cash for operating or even litigation purposes. I suspect we'll be seeing an acquisition soon, but heaven help us if the intent is to beef up the gravy train.

The idea of issuing debt to buy a company is bullish to me because it suggests mgmt thinks the current stock price is too cheap to use as currency.

We'll see.

Rambus to issue $300 mln in new debt
Wed Jan 26, 2005 04:13 PM ET
NEW YORK, Jan 26 (Reuters) - Rambus Inc. (RMBS.O: Quote, Profile, Research) , a designer of memory microchip technologies, said on Wednesday it plans to offer $300 million in new debt to finance a stock buyback.
The Los Altos, California, company intends to offer $300 million in zero coupon convertible senior notes due 2010.

It plans to use a portion of the proceeds to finance a $75 million stock buyback and the rest for working capital and general corporate purposes.


They need more money for litigation. That's scary.

Nothing like a fresh lawsuit to boost the stock price. It's up in AH trading.

Something is going on with Micron - my bet is Micron keeps dangling the "we'll settle any day now" carrot in front of Rambus. First the lawsuit is put on hold, now no mention of Micron in new litigation - Appleton's telling Rambus that the check is in the mail is my guess.

I hope this is auspicious for Samsung negotiations as well although I would bet that Rambus is loathe to sue Samsung for anything considering their relationship on other projects.

I think Rambus is doing a good job of cutting off all exits for Hynix and IFX. If they won't pay on SDRAM and DDR, then they won't produce DDR2, GDDR2, GDDR3, and XDR. They will also be on the hook for billions in the AT suit where they effectively (and illegally) squashed the propagation of RDRAM.

I guess this means however that litigation expenses aren't going to be coming down any time soon.

That would be a great chip for PS3/CELL. Four chips = 256MB at 51.2GBps. It would also be a good solution for high end Graphics processors.

Elixe - is that you or did Calbiker somehow abscond your ID?

Great article, Threejack. This is the kind of news Rambus needs to offset the inevitable courtroom loss in VA2. Another key piece would be a strong re-negotiated contract with Samsung. Samsung has made good money selling Rambus technology (RDRAM, DDR) and now XDR and they also now know that Rambus actually has technology that is infringed (a minimum of 29 claims).

Signing NVIDIA and ATI would be icing on the cake. I'd also take a settelement with Hynix on reasonable terms (one of which includes ratting out Micron and Infineon so that Rambus would have a bulletproof AT case) and then Rambus could take the remaining two to the cleaners - Payne or no Payne.

Kent - if I did't know better I would say you were using my playbook. I don't think your "worrying" is excessive and the possibility you raise is far from improbable. I don't think Intel is Rambus' friend - in fact I'm not sure Rambus has any friends. It would not surprise me to find out that part of Intel's motivation for licensing (funding) Rambus technology was to keep the MMs off balance. The last thing Intel wants is the MMs ganging up on it and what better scapegoat than Rambus to take all the heat.

I posted a doomsday scenario some time ago on this board (or was it Yahoo) and I'm still not convinced Rambus is not teetering on the precipice of a total implosion.

The most important thing that was said on the CC yesterday (IMHO) was that Danforth reiterated that he was not concerned about what Infineon et al. would discover in the ACP piercing. If Whyte and Read determine that ACP should not be pierced, then I think Rambus will be on surer footing. The SJ of infringement will happen - I want to make sure they won't be invalidated by fraud or litigation misconduct.

So keep worrying!

Ok - so Rambus won't get paid on any CELLs that use DDR2 which implies to me that the majority of CELLs will use DDR2.

With Toshiba being part of the CELL alliance and the RAM manufacturer in this case and with Toshiba also being a signed licensee for DDR2 with Rambus, it is somewhat less relevant whether XDR or DDR2 is going in there, right?

B. Riley has an update from last night - nothing groundbreaking in there, but if someone wants to read it, post your e-mail and I'll send it to you.

Also - Mike Crawford used to be the analyst at B. Riley but apparently he has moved on to Barrington.

2/22/05 va2 trial - 3 weeks long

3 claims on 2 patents at issue

Side note - the extent of the anger about what Hynix said about the European proceedings suggests no settlement talks are taking place

2/4/05 spoliation hearing in va2

6/13/05 second part of hynix bifurcated trial

hynix has one outstanding motion on non-infringement which could affect 9 of 59 patent claims

march date could slip if rambus doesn't get sj from whyte soon

feb 11 and 25th - hynix response on acp and hearing on acp piercing

We're in big trouble if Harold's reading/speaking abilities are indicative of his leadership abilities.

I guess I know now why the "quiet" period - it's because they had nothing to announce. We have a new CEO, but no new licensees, no litigation wins, no IBM confirmation on CELL yet...



Ha ha Cor - I got the 7% sequential increase in royalty right - that's about it!

Litigation was only up 800,000 over last quarter so 7.5 million.

Gravy train contribued 10 million to cash flow.

Q1 05
38 - 42 rev
31 - 34 operating costs
additional expense due to Harold

litigation expense - 7-9 million (holy crappola)

1.4 - 1.6 other income
36 - 38% tax rate

One patent revoked - two in play
they will pursue revoked patent - could take a year

Hynix, IFX, and Micron asked to respond to Rambus AT case in Europe

Wow - contract revenue came in 2 million light of expectations. Royalty was better than expected at 32.6 million. Litigation increased by 5.2 million over 4rth quarter last year...

FWIW - B. Riley (the most bullish of the analysts covering Rambus) has a .07 EPS target. I tried to paste the table in here but it's a big ole mess. Basically, however, he makes very conservative assumptions - his revenue is ligher than Cor's while his R&D and SGA assumptions are higher than Cor's. His Cost of contract revenue is higher than Cor's as well. He assumes 1.2 in other income and a tax rate at 28%. The only place he is lower is on the litigation expense.

It's another example of how the game works when you're bullish on a stock - you put very conservative estimates out there and when the company beats, you have something to brag about.

Sorry - just thought about it again and I realized 7% quarter over quarter sequential revenue growth is on the high side - let's assume 4% and then we'll close to the .08 eps figure. We'll find out soon enough.

Cor - your estimate seems pretty accurate - better than mine. Two things I would argue - your royalty number is too low and your cogs is too high. If Rambus sees 7% royalty growth, it puts royalty at 32.6. Last quarter's COGS was only 4.7 - apply the same 7% growth in COGS, you're at 5.0. That's a difference of 1.9 million from your estimate. So I would adjust your eps up by 1.3 cents per share (after taxes) to arrive at 8.6 cents a share.

This is fun - here's my estimate

I think I might be on the high side in my revenue estimate. Also, Threejack - why is your tax estimate so low? I still think they come in at .08, but for some reason I'm expecting decent incremental news (SJ's, or NVIDIA signing on for XDR, or confirmation that XDR and Redwood are used in CELL and that IBM is paying royalties)

Total Revenue---------- $41.859
COGS---------------------- $4.814
Gross Profit-------------- $37.045 ------- 88.5%
------- R&D--------- $9.460 ------- 22.6%
------- SGA-------- $8.400 ------- 20.1%
------- Legal-------- $8.400 ------- 20.1%
Total Costs-------------- $26.260
Operating Income----- $10.79 ------- 25.8%
Other Income----------- $1.40
EBIT------------------------ ---- $12.19
Income Tax--------------- $3.66
NI------------------------------ $8.53 ------- 20.4%

EPS (diluted) ---- 0.079

Can't get this damn thing to look right - sorry

Geez, you were in rare "skeptic" form last night : )

Yeah - sorry - just frustrated and cynical. I really couldn't tell you how Tate performed - there is so much promise coming out of Rambus (technology wise) but so little revenue coming in. We keep talking about the next generation technology RDRAM, XDRAM, Raser, Redwood... but the revenue isn't keeping up with expectations. The only thing I can say for a certainty is that Tate was handsomely compensated.

We need Whyte to throw us a safety line quickly - more than SJ of infringement - I want to see him come out and say that ACP will not be pierced in CA because Rambus did not destroy anything relevant. Then maybe this FTC nonsense will go away and Payne will look foolish in VA.

I'm waiting for the price spike before I buy some puts - I'm afraid I've waited to long.

Settlement is imminent - right?

Kenny - I thoroughly enjoy your posts on TMF - keep 'em comin'. I have to say however that those that think a settlement is imminent are jumping the gun. We've seen today that the FTC isn't going to let this case just wihter away, ACP piercing in the Hynix case is still a possibility, there are as yet no SJs of infringement, and Rambus is getting a new CEO. No company on the verge of a major settlement announces a new CEO unless one believes that Tate was actually the obstacle in settlement talks - yeah right. I'm sure that no one more than Tate would love to see a price spike before he exercises any more options.

More likely Tate is just seen as an ineffective CEO (if they could get rid of Bob as CFO I'd be even happier). The only thing that Geoff has excelled at is convincing the board to grant him obscene amounts of free money.

Anyway, the most powerful anecdotal evidence suggesting no settlement is the stock price. If the volume doubles and the price spikes 10% or more, then I'll wonder.

Anyway, I hope your calls are in or will be in the money. I've had my share of worthless expired Rambus calls.

Seminars in Colorado Springs, CO Jan 25; Ottawa, ON Feb 8; and Waltham, MA Feb 10.

Waltham - that's my neck of the woods - I wish I had some clue about that stuff and had the time to attend. I wouldn't mind just meeting some Rambus mgmt.

I see everyone is anxiously awaiting SJ's of infringement to come out of Whyte's court. If I've learned nothing else, it's that the legal system is slower than molasses, there are always exceptions the rules, and no one can accurately predict what is going to happen.

Unlike some others, I don't see the stock breaking 26 even with favorable rulings from Whyte. There is still that dark spoliation storm raining on Rambus' parade - in VA2 and potentially in CA. The bigger event to me over the next month is what Whyte determines on spoliation and the remedy for such determination.

Long, unhedged, and waiting for SJs.

After all, he may believe he can guide any Virginia jury to his desired conclusion. A jury verdict in favor of Infineon will be more difficult to reverse on appeal.

I agree - I think it would be in Rambus' interest (as crazy as this sounds) for Payne to dismiss Rambus' infringement claims as sanctions for litigation misconduct/spoliation. Rambus will have a much easier time getting that reversed and they will be able to proceed with their appeal to the CAFC that much sooner cause we all know that's where it's headed. Finally, if Whyte give Rambus just a slap on the wrist, it will stand in stark contrast to Payne's order and highlight the problems Rambus has had in VA.

We'll see.

Threejack - I share your frustration with the bums in the front office. Investors and message board lurkers like myself are left wondering if there is some deal with IBM or which pieces (if any) of Rambus technology are incorporated into CELL. Is anyone interested in XDR and if so what is the time frame on production and in what applications? What's the deal with FSB? Why isn't Sammy on board for DDR-2. Why aren't they any new licensees for the myriad Rambus technologies?

I also share your concern with the Payne factor. The risk from that corner has been conveniently downplayed over the last few weeks by the "bulls" and most disconcertingly by Nic as well. I postulated somewhere (here or Yahoo) that there may not be a trial in Virginia. The Payne could decide that litigation misconduct/spoliation are grounds enough to send Rambus packing.

That old codger doesn't give a rat's ass what's going on in CA or at the FTC or even at the CAFC unless it somehow supports his conviction that Rambus is the proverbial snake in the grass.

I'm unhedged and apparently unglued.

From Heggehougen on Yahoo...

FTC CC is getting slammed by the FTC judges
"Why do you think Rambus joined JEDEC - so that you could steal their IP?"
Rambus longs in at the trial: "Load up"

IMHO this could be over VERY soon - maybe as soon as after todays closed session following the hearing