Thread

1. ocd · 1790861971 · focus · HN ↗

   I'm not a business guy, but I think I would be very worried if I created any opening (even on the very long term) for competition to justify itself being built up to meet demand (or national security requirements of other countries) on an industry I mostly control, because I prioritized extremely high prices for a few years that might have the effect of changing the arithmetic for potential competitors that wouldn't have done it before.

   It makes me consider whether there would be retaliation in later years against the US intellectual property system in countries other than China. While RAM is a tangible product, the areas it serves aren't really.

   1. jgalt212 · 1790862987 · focus · HN ↗

      > because I prioritized extremely high prices for a few years that might have the effect of changing the arithmetic for potential competitors that wouldn't have done it before.

      Or maybe they believe the demand is not sustainable, and they don't want to fund $10B ghost fabs.

      1. Danox · 1790879066 · focus · HN ↗

         There will be new competitors. And there will be one or two companies that will take it (memory) in house and eliminate the memory companies out of the picture.

         The three greedy memory companies are changing the equations in tech industry and it won’t be in their favor in the long term.

         1. jgalt212 · 1790883256 · focus · HN ↗

            The counterpoint is that that new, and existing, mortgage originators did not fare so well after the mortgage market collapsed in the GFC. During large parts of the housing boom deep in the money mortgages could not be refinanced as quickly as borrowers would like due to capacity constraints at the originator level. Obv, not including subprime originators, where there was arguably 10X the needed capacity.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.