4 ms·

>This is probably not the case here. Why do we think that? Hasn't these companies and/or industry been caught and fined for illegally coordinating their effort

• tooltalk 8y ago
  Well, one of the reasons is that that's what we've expected all along. When Samsung announced a major expansion in early 2010's, many analysts predicted the price glut in 2015-16 that followed. That memory price glut (and a record loss by all industry participants) in turn discouraged capex by memory makers that resulted in the 2017-18 boom we just witnessed. So now, the windfall during the last boom likewise encouraged higher capex and production increase that is now driving down the price and their bottom line again -- the industry nearly completes a full cycle and is at another trough marked by decrease in capex and production cut. There is really nothing too conspiratorial about this business cycle. Sure, I think every memory makers at one point got caught price-fixing, but you can't just say they are colluding again just because they are all cutting production under unfavorable market condition (ie, lower demand/falling price).
  • wtallis 8y ago
    Another important contributing factor is how well the manufacturers do at getting each generation of NAND to actually work. Samsung's 48L 3D NAND was a relative failure around the same time that their competitors were trying to get their first 3D NANDs working to overcome the limitations of planar NAND. That kicked off a serious shortage, so when almost everybody came out with successful, high-yield 64L 3D NAND around the same time, prices had a long way to fall. The current moves are attempts to ensure that the transition to 96L NAND doesn't continue the price drops.