NVIDIA shows signs ... [2008 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Razor1 said:
...
Click to expand...

I just want to clarify that I wasn't making a judgment call as to whether NVidia is 'guilty' or not, just saying that it doesn't serve them any purpose to address the maelstrom of rumors, whichever side of the coin they're on.

Their OEM partners know, and frankly for them and their business, that's what materially matters. So whatever their situation, those that need to know, do know.

As for the investors, the information they're due comes today; I imagine we'll all gain a fair bit of insight.
 
Carl B said:
I just want to clarify that I wasn't making a judgment call as to whether NVidia is 'guilty' or not, just saying that it doesn't serve them any purpose to address the maelstrom of rumors, whichever side of the coin they're on.

Their OEM partners know, and frankly for them and their business, that's what materially matters. So whatever their situation, those that need to know, do know.

As for the investors, the information they're due comes today; I imagine we'll all gain a fair bit of insight.
Click to expand...


I hear ya, I was just stating, it seems Charlie is really going off the deep end :D
 
Well, Charlie's an idiot; I really hate his journalistic style, and how everything he covers/writes about is based always, always, solely on vendetta. I actually got involved with a cross-article spat with him back in the day, but never mind that.

Still, much as I loathe him, I can't deny that even in the context of his usual rants and refuse, that there has been any accuracy in his coverage as it concerns NVidia for the past month... it's ultimately much more damning for NVidia than it is for Charlie, even with this NV92 stuff seemingly back to form for him.
 
Failures or dodgy behavior, yes.
The next question is how many of those can be traced back to this substrate issue and not any of the other thousand reasons to RMA a cheap video card.

Because the Inq story is so prominent in the sampling pool for tech sites, people are going to think of the GPU failure first before they consider alternatives.
 
I guess they included "don't own any of them" to give the 40% something to respond with, but that's an awfully odd way to do it when you're trying to determine what percent are failing.
 
Razor1 said:
I don't know but if I was part of the SEC I would be pretty pissed, it shows disregard for shareholders and also bad business practices, so its not even in nV's better interest to make a public statement that would be a lie of the magnitude ...
Click to expand...
If you were part of the SEC, you'd be focussing either on the small trader with inside information who can be automatically unmasked by some trading data mining program (amount of prosecution effort essentially zero) or you'd be working on a big case with blatant and obvious security violations.

If one thing is being overstated again and again and again on this forum, it's the influence the SEC has over statements that are made by companies.

Yes, companies are careful about what they say in public to avoid trouble, but that doesn't mean that the risk of being fined/prosecuted/whatever is actually high. In cases like this, for example, it would be as simple as saying 'it turns out that the problem was more widespread than we initially thought' and they're more or less off the hook. For one, at lot of engineering issues aren't predictable up front after all and, second, do you really think that a government agency that whose wings have been clipped after years of hiring neglect are going to focus on this kind of he-said-she-said trivialities?

I really don't think so... But feel free to point out counter examples: the fact that I've never heard of any doesn't mean they arent' there...
 
missguiding consumers and shareholders has been in the public eye for the past few years ever since enron, and with the current mortgage scandals corporate scrutiny is at an all time high. Even the smallest hint of something going sour the SEC has been digging deeper, its not a good time to make false claims.
 
silent_guy said:
Feel free to believe that, but don't forget to google "We are well capitalized".
Click to expand...


When we are talking about billions of dollars, if thats what you feel is small, I guess when you compare 10% or more of a company's overall value, thats really not that small.
 
The SEC could care less about what's going on with NVidia, I can assure you of that. They are concerned with things that actually matter in terms of the US economy/securities situation right now. ;)

If we find out that there were massive preemptive short positions taken out on NV stock before the charge announcement, then maybe, maybe the SEC would put one guy on the case to investigate.
 
Carl B said:
The SEC could care less about what's going on with NVidia, I can assure you of that. They are concerned with things that actually matter in terms of the US economy/securities situation right now. ;)

If we find out that there were massive preemptive short positions taken out on NV stock before the charge announcement, then maybe, maybe the SEC would put one guy on the case to investigate.
Click to expand...

There have been several insider trading investigations in the graphics companies over the years, actually. I don't recall any of them being triggered by anything "massive", but then I suppose that's a subjective term.
 
Perhaps he means that while it appears that they couldn't care less, we should never underestimate the SEC's ability to find ways to care even less.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Unknown Soldier
Rumors Surface Again Claiming NVIDIA will Leave Chipset Business
Replies
8
Views
4K
ChrisRay
C
A
NVIDIA Q2 Results
2 3
Replies
47
Views
10K
Razor1
R
A
  • Locked
NVIDIA Q3 Earnings + CC
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
Arun
A
A
NVIDIA Morgan Stanley Webcast: Sony, G80 and 80/65nm
2
Replies
25
Views
13K
Nelsieus
N
C
Nvidia Financial Results. 4Q 2005
Replies
18
Views
5K
KimB
K
Back
Top