Nvda
- Thread starter PatrickL
- Start date
thatdude90210
Regular
Might have something to do with this report (link). We saw a previous report on Digitime about Leadtek being down 20%, both May and June, in video card sales... and that other Nvda Taiwan partners were experiencing the same. This has to reflect back on Nvda somehow. I'm guessing that those analysts already have the new Mercury report numbers (that the rest of us don't have).
It's a better card than their last one, yes; but they can not produce very many of them and apparently they're expensive as hell for nVidia to make.PatrickL said:
Also, nVidia lost most of their big OEM accounts to ATi this round....and the big OEM accounts are where the real money is to be made. (The fastest/best card is just for bragging rights, it's the shitty low-end ones that make 'em the money.
)digitalwanderer said:(The fastest/best card is just for bragging rights, it's the shitty low-end ones that make 'em the money.
However, it's widely believed that you need to have the fastest/best card to sell your shitty low-end cards. In this case, it's still questionable who has the fastes/best card, but we know only ATI has native PCIE which could make it the best in some people's (OEMs) eyes.
I think another major reason they're down is market appearance and their cards lack-there-of.
The chart suggests that NVDA's stock has lost all support and still has more downside potential. And it won't help a bit that Bloomberg is erroneously reporting that NVDA has said that it may not meet its revenue forecast, which could trigger widespread speculation about an imminent profit warning for the current quarter and further misery for shareholders. This is no time to catch a falling knife.
DANNER said:digitalwanderer said:(The fastest/best card is just for bragging rights, it's the shitty low-end ones that make 'em the money.
However, it's widely believed that you need to have the fastest/best card to sell your shitty low-end cards. In this case, it's still questionable who has the fastes/best card, but we know only ATI has native PCIE which could make it the best in some people's (OEMs) eyes.
the x800xt is the fastest in the majority of cases though. They are also coming off 18 months of having the fastest dx 9 card and have a native pci-e line up across the board .
All that would tip in favor of ati right now
I'm actually still up-in-the-air about which card is better/faster to be honest, they're both such ungodly beasts that it's damned hard to tell which IS faster!jvd said:
But I agree with the rest of your assessment, and I think the X800 is getting the nod as the de facto winner so far mainly because there aren't any high-end 6800s out there to compete with them. (IMHO!)
digitalwanderer said:I'm actually still up-in-the-air about which card is better/faster to be honest, they're both such ungodly beasts that it's damned hard to tell which IS faster!jvd said:
But I agree with the rest of your assessment, and I think the X800 is getting the nod as the de facto winner so far mainly because there aren't any high-end 6800s out there to compete with them. (IMHO!)
I dunno i'm baseing it on the marjority of the new benchmarks for newer games . Like sm 3.0 farcry vs sm2.0 for ati with ati coming out on top of a fictional 6800ultra extreme with fsaa on.
The 6800ultra is a very good card but the fact that its very very hard to find compare the hard to find x800xt pes which are at least every bit as good as the 6800ultras .
overclocked_enthusiasm
Regular
In addition to the AIB partners slow sales in Taiwan and the analyst questioning the revenue target for this quarter, NVDA has been mentioned as one of the worst values should options be expensed.
Their last quarter profit of .12 cents would have been .01 cent had options been expensed. Some estimates have their EPS as a negative number for the past fiscal year had options been expensed.
The entire marketing driven win at all costs corporate structure set up by Jen has come home to roost. Anyone who listened to the last NVDA conference call can attest to the desperation in his futile attempt to bash ATI's products. They are slowly but surely losing market share and leadership in this space. ATI now has a lower P/E, higher EPS, higher earnings growth, higher gross margins, higher revenue growth and soon to be (if not already) higher revenues.
NVDA as a stock is weak hold at best. I would rate it a sell until they can prove they have a viable PCIe OEM product and can ramp the 6800's into full production. Also, they have about $200 million in lost revenue from Xbox to replace starting next year. Their anemic organic growth will not fill that void as their efforts into handhelds has been weak and their core business is stagnant at best.
Full diclosure: I am long ATYT stock since the mid $4's last year
p.s. Do I get extra credit for that run on sentence? And don't say which one....
Their last quarter profit of .12 cents would have been .01 cent had options been expensed. Some estimates have their EPS as a negative number for the past fiscal year had options been expensed.
The entire marketing driven win at all costs corporate structure set up by Jen has come home to roost. Anyone who listened to the last NVDA conference call can attest to the desperation in his futile attempt to bash ATI's products. They are slowly but surely losing market share and leadership in this space. ATI now has a lower P/E, higher EPS, higher earnings growth, higher gross margins, higher revenue growth and soon to be (if not already) higher revenues.
NVDA as a stock is weak hold at best. I would rate it a sell until they can prove they have a viable PCIe OEM product and can ramp the 6800's into full production. Also, they have about $200 million in lost revenue from Xbox to replace starting next year. Their anemic organic growth will not fill that void as their efforts into handhelds has been weak and their core business is stagnant at best.
Full diclosure: I am long ATYT stock since the mid $4's last year
p.s. Do I get extra credit for that run on sentence? And don't say which one....
You get LOTS of extra credit from me for the interesting content of your post!overclocked_enthusiasm said:
I'm financially stupid, what does all the "had options been expensed" and "should options be expensed" talk mean? I really don't understand what the "options being expensed" means and I'd really like to if you don't mind taking the time to explain.
overclocked_enthusiasm
Regular
Expensing of options for major corporations is a hot topic right now. Many companies, especially tech, have historically enticed employees with stock options that are granted to them as part of their compensation. As these granted stock options are excercised or redeemed by the employee (management or line) the value of the stock is diluted by "x" number of shares.
In essense, the company is giving away shares of stock that don't exist but spring into existence once they are excercised or redeemed. Since this causes the total number of shares to increase, the market cap (total number of shares outstanding x stock price) of the company either has to increase or more likely the market takes the price of the stock down to reflect the new number of shares outstanding. Either way, the company is able to "pay" this employee potentially a great deal of money with stock options without booking it as a payroll expense.
Some companies are very aggressive with stock options and circumvent GAAP reporting with these backdoor employee compensations. They are in essence reporting pro forma earnings that are not reflecting the actual cost (the dilutive effect) of these stock options. Stock holders are obviously concerned by this as the practice dilutes their investment and it is not as transparent as it should be. Wall street is equally distressed by this practice because it allows the company to "hide" a great deal of their actual employee compensation which is a direct cost of doing business.
Therefore, most companies are being proactive in making sure that their employee stock options are becoming not only more tranparent but are actually being expensed on the P/L. Some companies, like NVDA, have resisted the change and are still behing the industry in addressing this issue. By moving the actual cost of these excercised stock options from thin air to the balance sheet where they belong, NVDA would have an EPS of ZEROish (+/- .05). ATI in contrast would take a .02 hit in earnings from last quarter (.19 to .17) by expensing options and reporting in US GAAP.
Here are a few links for you to look at:
http://www.fool.com/news/commentary...ln001999&npu=y&bounce=y&bounce2=y
Page 18 and page 50
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NSD/NVDA/reports/10k2003.pdf
In essense, the company is giving away shares of stock that don't exist but spring into existence once they are excercised or redeemed. Since this causes the total number of shares to increase, the market cap (total number of shares outstanding x stock price) of the company either has to increase or more likely the market takes the price of the stock down to reflect the new number of shares outstanding. Either way, the company is able to "pay" this employee potentially a great deal of money with stock options without booking it as a payroll expense.
Some companies are very aggressive with stock options and circumvent GAAP reporting with these backdoor employee compensations. They are in essence reporting pro forma earnings that are not reflecting the actual cost (the dilutive effect) of these stock options. Stock holders are obviously concerned by this as the practice dilutes their investment and it is not as transparent as it should be. Wall street is equally distressed by this practice because it allows the company to "hide" a great deal of their actual employee compensation which is a direct cost of doing business.
Therefore, most companies are being proactive in making sure that their employee stock options are becoming not only more tranparent but are actually being expensed on the P/L. Some companies, like NVDA, have resisted the change and are still behing the industry in addressing this issue. By moving the actual cost of these excercised stock options from thin air to the balance sheet where they belong, NVDA would have an EPS of ZEROish (+/- .05). ATI in contrast would take a .02 hit in earnings from last quarter (.19 to .17) by expensing options and reporting in US GAAP.
Here are a few links for you to look at:
http://www.fool.com/news/commentary...ln001999&npu=y&bounce=y&bounce2=y
Page 18 and page 50
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NSD/NVDA/reports/10k2003.pdf
Thanks overclocked_enthusiasm! That really does explain it to me well and clears up somethings I'd been wondering about.
You people who understand those kind of things just freaking amaze me, it's like a foreign language to me. :?
You people who understand those kind of things just freaking amaze me, it's like a foreign language to me. :?
overclocked_enthusiasm
Regular
No problem. I am sure there are several mistakes in my explantion as I am not an accountant nor am I a financial wizard. The overall context should be fairly accurate though.
It's amazing the stuff you pick up on the finance threads.
It's amazing the stuff you pick up on the finance threads.
Are you trying to tell me there is another board I should start following?kemosabe said:Dig, we talk about this kind of stuff regularly on the Yahoo ATYT board. When complemented with the tech-savvy posts on B3D forums, it provides a very solid background for anyone thinking of investing in the graphics sector.
Jeeze, when am I supposed to sleep? :?
