backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by BansheeX.. on Feb 24 at 1:43 AM

After a rough fourth quarter, NAND manufacturers hoped to get a break and instead they got slammed by more bad news, this time from Apple

Apple Inc. last year spent $1.2B USD on NAND flash memory for its consumer electronics devices.  Most of Apple's wildly popular iPod family sports the memory -- the iPod Shuffle, the iPod Nano, and the iPod Touches all use it for storage.  The iPhone also uses NAND, further increasing Apple's already sizable NAND appetite.  Thus Apple's decision hold a significant sway on NAND's fate.

Perhaps predicting slow iPod/iPhone growth, Apple dramatically scaled back its NAND predictions for 2008, sending NAND manufacturers into a panic.  The news, which also may signal bad news for Apple, may be a reflection of the sagging of the U.S. economy, burdened by the U.S. sub-prime mortgage crisis, which has led many analysts to predict a rather dire consumer market for the year.  Apple continues to cut prices in hopes of keeping sales alive, but the outlook is still far from rosy.

iSuppli announced the shifting estimate from Apple on Wednesday, stating, "Apple Inc. has slashed its 2008 NAND order forecast significantly and has informed suppliers that its demand growth will slow in 2008 compared to 2007."

Before iSuppli had predicted a 32% increase in NAND orders for 2008 from Apple.  The change caused iSuppli to drop its estimate for global NAND growth from 27 percent to "single digit" percentage growth from last year's $13.9B USD market.  According to iSuppli in Q1 '08 NAND manufacturers will also invest a 20 percent increase in capital spending, which will increase capacity and lower prices for the consumer, but add further to the suppliers financial woes. 

The year of 2007 held mixed results for NAND suppliers, but still may be looked back fondly upon in comparison to 2008.  In 2007 NAND overall saw 12.5 percent growth.  However in Q3 and Q4 of 2007, six of the top eight NAND producers saw sequential declines in revenue.  Only Micron and Intel escaped this trend.  Samsung and Toshiba, who hold the number one and two spots respectively, were among the losers, but remain on top of the struggling market.

Some top tier NAND suppliers vested in DRAM production as well will get doubly hit, as DRAM is supposed to have an extremely poor year as well, experiencing poor growth of only 4 percent.  While single digit growth may seem acceptable to some, the constant demands for increased capacity at lower prices means that single digit growth typically equates to significant revenue losses.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By BansheeX on 2/21/2008 3:52:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The housing market may not being doing so hot at the moment but the economy as a whole is not rotten. DailyTech even posted an article just last week about IT salaries being the highest they have been in years.


Nominal values mean nothing, this is what fools most people. Zimbabwe has plenty of billionaires, but their money isn't worth anything. The value that matters is the value of your money relative to other goods. If your salary is going up 3% every year, but inflation is outpacing it at 8% (in other words, prices of things you BUY with that money you're making), you're LOSING, not gaining. Salary nominal values being higher than historical salary nominal values don't really matter. And before anyone tries to post government statistics to "refute" this, please don't and buy a clue instead.

If you do some research, you'll realize that the housing market was a replacement bubble created by the fed after the tech stock bubble collapsed. To avoid a recession in the late 90s, interest rates were lowered to an artificial 1% for an entire year. Holding them there that low for that long caused a phony economic demand boom and encouraged easy credit getting poured out to people who had no business getting it, thus freeing up their income to the economy itself, avoiding the recession we needed to purge ourselves of those losses. So although it gave the appearance of economic growth, it was really just a short-term illusion because the equity value these people were buying into wasn't real. This basically delayed a recession we were supposed to have in the 90s into a bigger one much later when the phony home equity bubble collapsed, which is happening now. Since a recession is politically unacceptable, a laughable stimulus package is being made to borrow even more money the country doesn't have to give directly to Americans who are now cutting back on consumption as a result of their home foreclosures, in the hopes that it will "fix" the problem. But all it does is fuel the problem by creating more inflation. In layman's terms, it's like thinking all our problems can be solved by the fed printing a million dollars for each American. Err, no, that's not how it works. That's what inflation is, a debasement of currency value by having too many dollars chasing a finite amount of goods.

The only candidate who had a clue about the severity and sustainability of our problems was Ron Paul, and nobody voted for him. Many are now predicting a second depression somewhere around 2010/2011, given the big-spending policies of the other candidates and the general ignorance of the situation. You could write far more about it, but let's just say that the world is not as dependent on us as they used to be because we don't really manufacture anything. We just borrow our way to wealth, and the props the dollar is currently getting from foreigners will quickly erode when they realize the idiocy of investing in an overleveraged citizenry with a dog of currency and few exports.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By FITCamaro on 2/21/2008 3:57:43 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
the world is not as dependent on us as they used to be because we don't really manufacture anything.


You can thank our brilliant CEOs for moving everything overseas because it was good for profits. They forgot the fact that if we don't have any money, we can't buy their goods regardless of how cheap it is.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By BansheeX on 2/21/2008 4:10:37 PM , Rating: 3
Ah, but you're forgetting how government overregulation and bad economic policy gives the companies the incentive to go overseas in the first place. The blame cannot be placed squarely on them.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By teldar on 2/21/2008 4:20:35 PM , Rating: 2
He's also forgetting how the american unions priced themselves out of existence by demanding wages far above the quality of the work they produced. Look at the automotive industry. GM lost $39B in one quarter. I don't care if some of it was accounting magic. If a company can show a $39B loss, they're hemorrhaging cash, plain and simple. What was the cause? Substandard quality and excessive liability.

T


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By FITCamaro on 2/22/2008 10:26:26 AM , Rating: 2
Yes there were reasons, but still, they didn't look at the bigger picture.

And as for the guys comment on unions, yes some unions are a huge problem but not all industries have them. And not all unions are bad. The UAW definitely killed automotive manufacturing in America though. Many UAW workers earn more than level 2 and 3 engineers with nothing more than a high school diploma and they wonder why the companies want to ship the jobs overseas or cut their pay. Unskilled labor in a factory shouldn't pay $50,000 a year much less the $75,000+ some are making.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By mdogs444 on 2/21/2008 4:18:22 PM , Rating: 2
EPA Regulations in USA? Yes, creates a much higher production cost. That is one major reason for the shift to other countries.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By BansheeX on 2/21/2008 10:31:36 PM , Rating: 2
The EPA is an interesting ABC agency that oftentimes oversteps its bounds under the pretense of doing what's best for you (like most unconstitutional government agencies). The real problem in this country is a lack of understanding of private property rights, the free market, and the belief that state and local governments need federal agencies to oversee the affairs of a populace who already has a vested interest in their own economic and bodily health. The only thing they're really good at is appropriating taxpayer money to fund their often goofy and unscientific efforts.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=154

I also recommend Friedman. He makes the brains of socialist big-government people explode.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfdRpyfEmBE

I suppose next I'll have to explain NAFTA and how fails to offset tariffs on U.S. exports and gives big corporations the cheap labor and coercive alliances they need to drive small domestic businesses into the gutter.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By Ringold on 2/22/2008 11:23:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I also recommend Friedman. He makes the brains of socialist big-government people explode.


In order for that to happen, socialists would have to actually think about what he's saying. His ideas are so completely alien to the entire framework through which they view their lives and the entire world that in my experience Friedman rolls off liberals like water rolls off a duck. Entertaining both his ideas and maintaining their own world view is about as stable as mixing matter and antimatter, so it just doesn't happen. :\

He was one of the greatest proponents of modern neoclassical economics (or whatever one wants to call the resurgence of modernized neoclassical economics in response to nearly a wasted century in pursuit of communism) to ever live.


RE: Rotten ecomomy?
By BansheeX on 2/21/2008 10:46:08 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, this Friedman clip actually touches on the environment issue a bit more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PaN9M4WwHw


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki