<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Q4 2007 Wrap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/</link>
	<description>modu msystems and Beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 06:18:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: savolainen</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-500</link>
		<dc:creator>savolainen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-500</guid>
		<description>An acquaintance passed along the following machine translation from Hebrew, of a recent interesting article from the site NRG. Ban and Litsyn have agreed to drop their lawsuit against msystems/SanDisk for compensation of $4M. 

This is the first I have seen of mention of a possible direct connection between Stratosphere and x4:

Compromise between SanDisk to the keys of the disk-on-key Ban and Litsyn, that developed drives of memory of the flash that are small when worked with M-systems, will receive 4 million dollar in the frame of agreement that is secret. In return they will erase the claim against SanDisk
 
7/1/08
 
At the start of this week was signed agreement of compromise between the company SanDisk, that acquired M-systems, and Amir Ban and professor &#039; Shimon Litsyn, that developed drives of memory of flash are small ) disk on key (when worked with M-systems. By right of the use in this technology is sold if M-systems SanDisk in exchange for 1.5 billion dollar. According to agreement of thaw, Ban and Litsyn will receive about 4 million dollar. In return, is erased the claim that served Ban against parent company M-systems and founder of the company Dov Moran in the assertion of question violated their obligation towards him Onicso to themselves you are profitable the invention. The agreement itself will not be served for approval of the court, inasmuch as that will be prepared secret. The agreement was obtained in the frame of procedure
 
Ban was project manager &quot; stratosphere &quot; of M-systems, that his different name pursuant for 4x and that business in the development of the disk on key. According to him, if M-systems obligated to establish a company to the project, but after became clear her that the project of winner to the great success and that the company Toshiba is impressed from him very – changed her mind and requested to the asset to herself every fruits of the project. Accordingly sued Ban is a third from the rights that produced from the invention if M-systems and has her shares. Also concluded age, that joined the project in the stage more late, served a claim against if M-systems, SanDisk, Amir Ban and Dov Moran.

[link below in Hebrew]

http://www.nrg.co.il/online/10/ART1/681/925.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An acquaintance passed along the following machine translation from Hebrew, of a recent interesting article from the site NRG. Ban and Litsyn have agreed to drop their lawsuit against msystems/SanDisk for compensation of $4M. </p>
<p>This is the first I have seen of mention of a possible direct connection between Stratosphere and x4:</p>
<p>Compromise between SanDisk to the keys of the disk-on-key Ban and Litsyn, that developed drives of memory of the flash that are small when worked with M-systems, will receive 4 million dollar in the frame of agreement that is secret. In return they will erase the claim against SanDisk</p>
<p>7/1/08</p>
<p>At the start of this week was signed agreement of compromise between the company SanDisk, that acquired M-systems, and Amir Ban and professor &#8216; Shimon Litsyn, that developed drives of memory of flash are small ) disk on key (when worked with M-systems. By right of the use in this technology is sold if M-systems SanDisk in exchange for 1.5 billion dollar. According to agreement of thaw, Ban and Litsyn will receive about 4 million dollar. In return, is erased the claim that served Ban against parent company M-systems and founder of the company Dov Moran in the assertion of question violated their obligation towards him Onicso to themselves you are profitable the invention. The agreement itself will not be served for approval of the court, inasmuch as that will be prepared secret. The agreement was obtained in the frame of procedure</p>
<p>Ban was project manager &#8221; stratosphere &#8221; of M-systems, that his different name pursuant for 4x and that business in the development of the disk on key. According to him, if M-systems obligated to establish a company to the project, but after became clear her that the project of winner to the great success and that the company Toshiba is impressed from him very – changed her mind and requested to the asset to herself every fruits of the project. Accordingly sued Ban is a third from the rights that produced from the invention if M-systems and has her shares. Also concluded age, that joined the project in the stage more late, served a claim against if M-systems, SanDisk, Amir Ban and Dov Moran.</p>
<p>[link below in Hebrew]</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nrg.co.il/online/10/ART1/681/925.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nrg.co.il/online/10/ART1/681/925.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: savolainen</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-497</link>
		<dc:creator>savolainen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-497</guid>
		<description>Greetings Dan,

While there appears to be reason to believe that Rambus and SNDK/Toshiba might be working together on some interface angle, I think you are probably right about SSSS LLC: partner Toshiba, IP from Ramot and licensing x4. I may use this Sunday’s post as an excuse to go back through my notes. 

A couple of reservations: as far as I know Toshiba and SNDK have never had a meeting of the minds on Toshiba licensing x4. While it is clear that the Litsyn/Ban patent is remarkable, it is not clear that it is directly tied to x4.

I don’t know what you know of the Amir Ban lawsuit. Way back in 2004, it was what originally pointed me to the older most interesting Litsyn/Ban patent. 

In any case in the lawsuit Ban revealed that FLSH had been working on a technology known at the time as the Stratosphere technology. The key seems to be programming using groups of flash memory cells in addition to the cells themselves-- a very clever way to store more info using the same number of flash memory cells, because groups of cells can store info too.

In any case Ban claimed that FLSH started working on the technology in 2000 and had a working prototype by 2003 and that as far back as 2003 Toshiba was interested in entering into negotiations for the technology.

I have long suspected that Stratosphere was somehow connected to x4. If there is a connection, no one has ever explained it , to my knowledge.

Eli has said that current licenses do not cover x4, so it certainly follows that SSSS LLC might be the licensing vehicle for x4. If so, this would also seem to imply that SNDK is confident in the technology.

Thanks,
Savo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greetings Dan,</p>
<p>While there appears to be reason to believe that Rambus and SNDK/Toshiba might be working together on some interface angle, I think you are probably right about SSSS LLC: partner Toshiba, IP from Ramot and licensing x4. I may use this Sunday’s post as an excuse to go back through my notes. </p>
<p>A couple of reservations: as far as I know Toshiba and SNDK have never had a meeting of the minds on Toshiba licensing x4. While it is clear that the Litsyn/Ban patent is remarkable, it is not clear that it is directly tied to x4.</p>
<p>I don’t know what you know of the Amir Ban lawsuit. Way back in 2004, it was what originally pointed me to the older most interesting Litsyn/Ban patent. </p>
<p>In any case in the lawsuit Ban revealed that FLSH had been working on a technology known at the time as the Stratosphere technology. The key seems to be programming using groups of flash memory cells in addition to the cells themselves&#8211; a very clever way to store more info using the same number of flash memory cells, because groups of cells can store info too.</p>
<p>In any case Ban claimed that FLSH started working on the technology in 2000 and had a working prototype by 2003 and that as far back as 2003 Toshiba was interested in entering into negotiations for the technology.</p>
<p>I have long suspected that Stratosphere was somehow connected to x4. If there is a connection, no one has ever explained it , to my knowledge.</p>
<p>Eli has said that current licenses do not cover x4, so it certainly follows that SSSS LLC might be the licensing vehicle for x4. If so, this would also seem to imply that SNDK is confident in the technology.</p>
<p>Thanks,<br />
Savo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: savolainen</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-489</link>
		<dc:creator>savolainen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-489</guid>
		<description>Greetings Dan,

Nice to hear from you. I know you follow SanDisk very closely, as your comments once again reflect. RAMOT and x4 would be an interesting twist and it would explain the lack of disclosure on the other side.

As you correctly deduced, R....s was meant to indicate Rambus.  You make a good argument against Rambus, but accounting can be slippery.

In any case, I don’t feel Rambus is a sure thing, and maybe not more likely than Toshiba, but a lot of pieces fit the puzzle for SSSS LLC -- if the key is high speed interface IP  which can be combined with SNDK MLC IP.

I don’t think ONFi is going anywhere, but the direction might be relevant and Rambus is working on NAND.

Rambus started talking about NAND/flash last year about the same time as SSSS LLC surfaced.

From Q2 Rambus cc: 

“ I&#039;m not going to talk about this [flash memory] too much because we have some very interesting progress in this area. We are engaged with flash companies looking at some future technology areas.”

“ Michael Cohen - Pacific American Securities: Are you focused in flash on how it -- the memory communicates to the controller, or specifically to unique use of the flash memory and high speed connections there?

Sharon Holt [Rambus] I would say both, yes.”

From Q3 Rambus cc:

“And so, as we&#039;re [Rambus] looking at our NAND efforts going on here... taking a look at very difficult system level problems and how we could apply our Flash technologies to those.” 

As no doubt you are aware, Rambus is up to its eyeballs with DRAM lawsuits with most of the other large NAND players. Maybe in parallel Rambus could be working with one of them on flash, but it does seem a bit unlikely.

Had better stop now or I’ll never finish modu. 

Regards,
Savo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greetings Dan,</p>
<p>Nice to hear from you. I know you follow SanDisk very closely, as your comments once again reflect. RAMOT and x4 would be an interesting twist and it would explain the lack of disclosure on the other side.</p>
<p>As you correctly deduced, R&#8230;.s was meant to indicate Rambus.  You make a good argument against Rambus, but accounting can be slippery.</p>
<p>In any case, I don’t feel Rambus is a sure thing, and maybe not more likely than Toshiba, but a lot of pieces fit the puzzle for SSSS LLC &#8212; if the key is high speed interface IP  which can be combined with SNDK MLC IP.</p>
<p>I don’t think ONFi is going anywhere, but the direction might be relevant and Rambus is working on NAND.</p>
<p>Rambus started talking about NAND/flash last year about the same time as SSSS LLC surfaced.</p>
<p>From Q2 Rambus cc: </p>
<p>“ I&#8217;m not going to talk about this [flash memory] too much because we have some very interesting progress in this area. We are engaged with flash companies looking at some future technology areas.”</p>
<p>“ Michael Cohen &#8211; Pacific American Securities: Are you focused in flash on how it &#8212; the memory communicates to the controller, or specifically to unique use of the flash memory and high speed connections there?</p>
<p>Sharon Holt [Rambus] I would say both, yes.”</p>
<p>From Q3 Rambus cc:</p>
<p>“And so, as we&#8217;re [Rambus] looking at our NAND efforts going on here&#8230; taking a look at very difficult system level problems and how we could apply our Flash technologies to those.” </p>
<p>As no doubt you are aware, Rambus is up to its eyeballs with DRAM lawsuits with most of the other large NAND players. Maybe in parallel Rambus could be working with one of them on flash, but it does seem a bit unlikely.</p>
<p>Had better stop now or I’ll never finish modu. </p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Savo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Poofypuppy</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-488</link>
		<dc:creator>Poofypuppy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 03:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-488</guid>
		<description>Dan, my thinking was that Savo meant Renesas.  But I trust that he&#039;ll elaborate more soon.  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan, my thinking was that Savo meant Renesas.  But I trust that he&#8217;ll elaborate more soon.  <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-487</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Feb 2008 16:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-487</guid>
		<description>&quot;This week, I hope to modu. The week after, if all goes according to plan, I will ramble on a bit about a new most promising candidate for SNDK’s partner in SSSS LLC: [R….s]. ONFI’s worst nightmare.&quot;

Don&#039;t think it is Rambus, for the following reasons:

1) The venture was financed with $10.2M from the partners – Nothing on RAMBUS cash flow.
 2) The venture invested $10M for the acquisition of intellectual property (with obligation of another $32.5M should the venture be profitable – again nothing on cash flow, revenue (regarding the 10M) or even in a note and considering that Rambus has quarterly revenue of $40M this deal should have been very significant to disclose.
 3) Eli said: &quot;we have formed a partnership with another major owner of system level flash IP&quot; – major owner of flash IP means the partner has strong patents on system level IP and while RAMBUS has stated once that they are expecting some royalty bearing agreement (that did not materialize), I doubt that they have strong system level that can interest SanDisk. My guess that they are working with Toshiba but no agreement is reached as of today.

The questions – 1) who is the partner 2) who is the holder of the intellectual IP that is so valuable to be worth $42.5M even now and 3) Is the partner and the holder of IP the same person.

The lack of disclosure from the other side tells me that this is not a public company. But who has valuable MLC IP that even SanDisk needs? 

Who developed X4 which is system level solution?

x4 technology - Nand Flash memory 
mSystems x4 technology was developed in collaboration with Tel Aviv University&#039;s (TAU) School of Electrical Engineering and exclusively licensed to mSystems, for use in flash memory products, by Ramot, the technology transfer company and commercialization arm of TAU

And check out Simon Litsyn patents
 http://www.patentstorm.us/inventors/Simon_Litsyn-1162198.html


My guess is that RAMOT is the partner and that the SSD venture will also license the X4 - the system level solution in X4 is probably the core of the MLC SSD solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;This week, I hope to modu. The week after, if all goes according to plan, I will ramble on a bit about a new most promising candidate for SNDK’s partner in SSSS LLC: [R….s]. ONFI’s worst nightmare.&#8221;</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t think it is Rambus, for the following reasons:</p>
<p>1) The venture was financed with $10.2M from the partners – Nothing on RAMBUS cash flow.<br />
 2) The venture invested $10M for the acquisition of intellectual property (with obligation of another $32.5M should the venture be profitable – again nothing on cash flow, revenue (regarding the 10M) or even in a note and considering that Rambus has quarterly revenue of $40M this deal should have been very significant to disclose.<br />
 3) Eli said: &#8220;we have formed a partnership with another major owner of system level flash IP&#8221; – major owner of flash IP means the partner has strong patents on system level IP and while RAMBUS has stated once that they are expecting some royalty bearing agreement (that did not materialize), I doubt that they have strong system level that can interest SanDisk. My guess that they are working with Toshiba but no agreement is reached as of today.</p>
<p>The questions – 1) who is the partner 2) who is the holder of the intellectual IP that is so valuable to be worth $42.5M even now and 3) Is the partner and the holder of IP the same person.</p>
<p>The lack of disclosure from the other side tells me that this is not a public company. But who has valuable MLC IP that even SanDisk needs? </p>
<p>Who developed X4 which is system level solution?</p>
<p>x4 technology &#8211; Nand Flash memory<br />
mSystems x4 technology was developed in collaboration with Tel Aviv University&#8217;s (TAU) School of Electrical Engineering and exclusively licensed to mSystems, for use in flash memory products, by Ramot, the technology transfer company and commercialization arm of TAU</p>
<p>And check out Simon Litsyn patents<br />
 <a href="http://www.patentstorm.us/inventors/Simon_Litsyn-1162198.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.patentstorm.us/inventors/Simon_Litsyn-1162198.html</a></p>
<p>My guess is that RAMOT is the partner and that the SSD venture will also license the X4 &#8211; the system level solution in X4 is probably the core of the MLC SSD solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: savolainen</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-484</link>
		<dc:creator>savolainen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-484</guid>
		<description>Greetings bob77977,

Sorry about not getting back to you sooner. I have been on the road and otherwise distracted. 

Personally I am not that concerned about Micron. This, after all, is a company hemorrhaging cash with a tradition big on talk and little on show.  Micron is bumping along in market share at single digits and needs a huge bump to hit the magic 20% target survival share.  

In-Stat has Intel as numero uno, the prime candidate, for dropping out of the NAND flash business. I agree. If this comes to pass, Micron has big problems -- No deep pockets, and No IP force field. W/o Intel, Micron’s NAND aspirations will be toast.

 It might take a couple of years, but in my opinion, the writing is on the wall. 

http://www.tgdaily.com/index2.php?option=com_content&amp;do_pdf=1&amp;id=35666

Micron’s NAND situation would make a good subject for a post, but it might take a while for me to get to it. 

This week, I hope to modu. The week after, if all goes according to plan, I will ramble on a bit about a new most promising candidate for SNDK’s partner in SSSS LLC: [R....s].  ONFI’s worst nightmare.  

SanDisk’s analyst day is scheduled for 25 February. This should be a gold mine which likely will distract me for a while.

Best,
Savo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greetings bob77977,</p>
<p>Sorry about not getting back to you sooner. I have been on the road and otherwise distracted. </p>
<p>Personally I am not that concerned about Micron. This, after all, is a company hemorrhaging cash with a tradition big on talk and little on show.  Micron is bumping along in market share at single digits and needs a huge bump to hit the magic 20% target survival share.  </p>
<p>In-Stat has Intel as numero uno, the prime candidate, for dropping out of the NAND flash business. I agree. If this comes to pass, Micron has big problems &#8212; No deep pockets, and No IP force field. W/o Intel, Micron’s NAND aspirations will be toast.</p>
<p> It might take a couple of years, but in my opinion, the writing is on the wall. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.tgdaily.com/index2.php?option=com_content&amp;do_pdf=1&amp;id=35666" rel="nofollow">http://www.tgdaily.com/index2.php?option=com_content&amp;do_pdf=1&amp;id=35666</a></p>
<p>Micron’s NAND situation would make a good subject for a post, but it might take a while for me to get to it. </p>
<p>This week, I hope to modu. The week after, if all goes according to plan, I will ramble on a bit about a new most promising candidate for SNDK’s partner in SSSS LLC: [R....s].  ONFI’s worst nightmare.  </p>
<p>SanDisk’s analyst day is scheduled for 25 February. This should be a gold mine which likely will distract me for a while.</p>
<p>Best,<br />
Savo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bob77977</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-475</link>
		<dc:creator>bob77977</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2008 08:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-475</guid>
		<description>sorry, here is the link

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/rss/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206400067&amp;cid=RSSfeed_eetimes_semiRSS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sorry, here is the link</p>
<p><a href="http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/rss/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206400067&amp;cid=RSSfeed_eetimes_semiRSS" rel="nofollow">http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/rss/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206400067&amp;cid=RSSfeed_eetimes_semiRSS</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bob77977</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-474</link>
		<dc:creator>bob77977</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2008 08:54:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-474</guid>
		<description>hi savo,
eli talks about sandisk&#039;s lead in chip production. here is a link showing the possibility of micron getting to lead. 35nm in Q3.
if going from 56m to 43nm is 50% cut of realestate on chip, the difference between 43nm and 35nm is roughly 40% cut.
which means micron&#039;s chips will be 40% cheaper to produce - thats a hell of an edge. of course, one have to compare total productions but still it arouses the question - is samsung going to sign with micron a royalty agreement rather then with sandisk? whats your opinion?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi savo,<br />
eli talks about sandisk&#8217;s lead in chip production. here is a link showing the possibility of micron getting to lead. 35nm in Q3.<br />
if going from 56m to 43nm is 50% cut of realestate on chip, the difference between 43nm and 35nm is roughly 40% cut.<br />
which means micron&#8217;s chips will be 40% cheaper to produce &#8211; thats a hell of an edge. of course, one have to compare total productions but still it arouses the question &#8211; is samsung going to sign with micron a royalty agreement rather then with sandisk? whats your opinion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Goldy</title>
		<link>http://savolainen.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/q4-2007-wrap/#comment-472</link>
		<dc:creator>Goldy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 02:07:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://savolainen.wordpress.com/?p=105#comment-472</guid>
		<description>Thank you for a fabulous summary. While 2008 earnings are somewhat unclear at this point and thus I am hesitant to put too much faith in the cheap forward implied PE ratio, I am 100% confident buying SNDK at essentially the lowest p/book and p/sales ratios it has ever traded at... especially when I believe 2008 is trough earnings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for a fabulous summary. While 2008 earnings are somewhat unclear at this point and thus I am hesitant to put too much faith in the cheap forward implied PE ratio, I am 100% confident buying SNDK at essentially the lowest p/book and p/sales ratios it has ever traded at&#8230; especially when I believe 2008 is trough earnings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
