NVIDIA Q2 Results

Would they include the royalties from Sony Or is that when the actual PS3s are sold?

 

Q3.

Any links Uttar?

 

Thanks.

Noooooo! (re:G80)

 

Question: ".....G80?"
Answer: *laughter* "We haven´t yet announced G80, erm, what´s G80? *laughter*

 

"We dont know anything about G80"

But after that Jen emphasized that you'll be seeing more (new) G7x parts this year which deflated my balloon.

 

forget G80, heh, I wanna know what a mature DX10 Nvidia GPU is gonna be all about, so tell me about the G90 damnit, Jen Jsun, your Nvidia monkeys are busy toiling away on it as we type, lol.

 

Thanks Uttar.

 

That is not particularly indicative of a September G80. If anything it suggests a November G80.

But "suggests" is the key word there.

 

Yet, there's something odd about it.

The piece on HKEPC.com talks about a "7950 GT", but not a 7950 GTX...

 

I'd think that the G80 would come out no earlier than a month or two before Vista rolls out. Without a concrete data on Vista there's no reason to release a flagship DX10 card that could easily be up for a refresh by the time Vista arrives.

I'd also be curious to the adoption rate of the G80 if it doesn't not significantly trounce their existing flagship card in XP/DX9. Why not milk the 79xx until inventory is out, if the margins are high (as they appear to be) and stock up on G80's so you can flood the market properly when it's time.

That'd be my choice.

 

Launching another ultra high-end-only with G80 would fit nicely with a niche market, such as the one for 7950 GX2.
High-margin parts is what they fancy as of late, right ?
And a low volume part would be easier to make, provided there was a **price too high for mere mortals** coup (7800 GTX 512 comes to mind...).


Plus, there's the added "halo effect" bonus.
Combined with a price-cut on mainstream/low-end GPU's/Refresh GPU's, there's a lot to be milked from G7x yet (man, i just sounded like Jen-Hsun, yikes... ).
Well, the same could be said about RV570 and R580+, i guess.

 

Okay, completely for funsies, ABSOLUTELY NO INSIDE INFORMATION at play here, my B3D G80 Announce Date pool entry:

November 9th, 2006

If I want another entry later, I have to find another virtual dollar somewhere.

 

I can understand RAMBUS having to restate several years of earnings because of improperly expensed stock options--I'd expect RAMBUS to try and inflate its positive situation to the greatest degree possible--but Apple, and now nVidia?

I know that sometime back the SEC changed the rules relating to how stock options may be expensed, and I remember reading at the time, IIRC, statements from Microsoft talking about how it was going to change its accounting procedures to reflect the changes. Seems to me I also read something about that from Apple, too.

It just seems darned odd that all of these companies are jumping on the "We're sorry, but we have to restate our earnings for the last several years" bandwagon almost simultaneously. I cannot imagine how this would thrill investors in any of these companies, and this would at least seem to be the stuff that stockholder lawsuits are made of. For that reason I would be skeptical of any glowing news aside from the restatements that any of these companies announce, as that would seem to be on the order of self-serving camouflage to attempt to blunt the impact of restating income for several years--because, obviously, investors had a right to think, and most certainly did think, that these companies got their earnings statements right the first time.

If I had to draw any general conclusions from what is happening here I'd say that it causes me a little worry about the health of some of the tech industry's bigger players. The problem with earnings statements in general, and with traditional accounting rules, has been that when a company starts restating past earnings reports, especially over long periods of time, this generally indicates that fires have been burning in these companies for extended periods of time prior to the time those past earnings are actually restated.

What typically happens is that the smoke, and indeed the fire itself, have simply been hidden until the last possible moment that a restatement of earnings becomes the only possible option for company accountants and lawyers trying to comply with the letter of the law after possibly having ignored its spirit for as long as possible. It's difficult to see how all of these companies could have made a habit out of improperly stating their earnings for a period of years. I do not feel these issues have been explained very well by the financial press so far and it's that murkiness that bothers me.

 

I look at Q1 report and it says:

So it's a puzzlement, for sure, what they screwed the pooch on, and what years they are looking the closest at. I suspect it's not going to be hugely material, but that's a hunch only. For comparison purposes, FY2006 (ending Jan. 2006) net income for NV was $302M

 

expensing and backdating are different issues altogether; they just started expensing fy07...

 

So no one asked about possible business from Apple -- iPod design win?

 

No, and I don't think they would comment on that either.