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. httpz · 1790887987 · focus · HN ↗

      The Big 3 (Samsung, Hynix, Micron) have been playing this game for 30+ years. There used to be many more DRAM companies but most of them went bankrupt when DRAM was cheap because the big 3 will intentionally drive the price down to bankrupt the competition. Now that they have a tri-opoly, they're milking the profits. New competition will emerge but they don't have the capital of the big 3 so they likely won't survive the next DRAM winter.

      1. bigbadfeline · 1790890302 · focus · HN ↗

         > The Big 3 (Samsung, Hynix, Micron) have been playing this game for 30+ years. There used to be many more DRAM companies but most of them went bankrupt when DRAM was cheap because the big 3 will intentionally drive the price down to bankrupt the competition. Now that they have a tri-opoly, they're milking the profits.

         Exactly this. Unfortunately, this strategy has become standard practice in every area of the economy and it's a huge corrupting force.

      2. seizethecheese · 1790890420 · focus · HN ↗

         You seem to be adding a lot of intentionality to price swings that seem expected when supply is relatively fixed while demand fluctuates. (Maybe you’re right, but it’s not the simpler explanation.)

         1. httpz · 1790891847 · focus · HN ↗

            The supply isn't fixed. A new plant takes 3-5 years to build and cost tens of billions. DRAM companies don't always know where the demand will be when the next plant completes. 2 years ago there was too much supply so DRAM price hit rock bottom. So DRAM companies held back on investing in new plants so here we are now.

            1. seizethecheese · 1790892407 · focus · HN ↗

               The comment said "relatively fixed" and a charitable reading that "relatively" here means in the short run.
         2. rtpg · 1790896716 · focus · HN ↗

            All three of those companies were convicted in a price fixing scandal.

            I feel like it's "obvious" that it's not particularly in the interests of these companies to increase production in the current environment. Except perhaps in the long term "we don't want to get nationalized" or something, I suppose.

            Personally I do not think think that they are dragging their feet extremely intentionally, but I do think they are structurally incentivised to do so.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.