NVIDIA shows signs ... [2008 - 2017]

While in monetary terms $0.40 a chip isn't that much, for an entry level, or even mainstream, chip it probably equates to quite a few margin points.

 

Then again, NVIDIA probably doesn't sell GT218s to OEMs for $20, do they? Since the cards end up selling for about $35 in retail, I'd imagine NVIDIA sells the GPU for something like $10, so the fee would be closer to $0.2.

I think the damages are the big deal, here.

 

Does the EU "licence" cover all infringing patents that the US ITC ruled on tho?

I agree that nV will end up paying Rambus.

*nV: "Alright Mr Rambus, let's negotiate fees based on the EU mandatory rate."*

*RB: "Certainly Mr nV, while you pop down to accounting & write a check for the last eight years we'll see if our negotiating team is available before the 8th of January 2015."*

 

I don't believe it covers all products affected by the US ruling.

As well, it's not guaranteed that the EU ruling would allow Nvidia to bypass US Patent infringement judgements. It could play in favorably with an Appeal or awarding of damages in the US, however, as a judge could look at that as a reference point when determining possible awards.

At this point, Nvidia is basically trying to figure out the cheapest way out of this. They are hoping that damages will be limited to the scope of the EU ruling, but the US courts aren't bound by that.

Regards,
SB

 

Ouch "Increased Memory Costs"

 

Translation from PR spin, "We could not compete in the consumer performance segment, so the only thing that sold was our notebook and low end parts."

Regards,
SB

 

I thought "The increased solution cost of Discrete GPUs" was something that reflects Charlie's sentiments well

 

One question if I may, does this also affect Nvidia's chipset-business? Did they infringe the patent with those as well? They must have made a great many million of chips which infringed anyhow, but if the final price is to scale linearly with number of chips that could very well get very expensive.

 

I laugh... The statement made my day.

 

These charts sum that up just about right SB, 2/3rds of nV's consumer graphics chips are in the <$100 market.

 

You can also see by that chart that ATI was particularly weak in the 200-300 USD segment (5830).

Regards,
SB

 

Hmn, I suppose once they are actually paying fees their current products will no longer be infringing but I guess that would be the time to go back to "court" for yet another judgement to get the import ban lifted. With the matter of the last eight years still unsettled it could be a waste of time & the import ban could stand.

As well as trying to find the cheapest way out of this I think they are looking for a bit of face-saving. To my mind the statement, "We intend to take advantage of the mandatory European Commission License that is available", points this way.
A more honest/accurate statement would have been, "we'll be paying fees based on the European mandatory settlement".

One thing greatly surprises me, especially since the profit warning. Charlie has yet to stick the knife in.

 

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll have a field day with this…

 

Yep, I suppose it is hard to type when you are paralysed with laughter.

 

It's a bit too much to have and a profit warning and an erosion of sales in Q2 on the same day. I think he needs some positive news to balance his article.

 

He could talk about some Tegra 2 products finally making it to market?

 

He just did.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/07/14/sonys-psp2-powered-nvidias-tegra-line/

 

Well, his article is up.
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/07/29/nvidias-mistakes-catch-bottom-line/

Not his best work imo. In my case "best" means amusing.tho.

Couldn't see anything positive.

 

deleted

 

You haven't really been reading this thread have you?