| |
| ▲ | VladStanimir 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't think its from the ML collapse FUD, its most likely from the multiple time's in the past when they overbuilt and it resulted in a memory oversupply and price collapses. The 1985–1988, 1993–1994, 1998–2002 and the post pandemic oversupply. These were all cases where shortages followed by over corrections caused oversupply, financial losses due to low prices and fewer surviving companies. I think they're taking their time and are cautiously adding more capacity in such a way that prices won't end up collapsing again. Regardless, the result is still that we the consumers have to pay more. | | |
| ▲ | bee_rider 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | At this point the remaining memory companies are… the ones that didn’t die during an over-supply collapse, right? I guess there’s been a strong evolutionary pressure against giving consumers what we want, haha. | |
| ▲ | DoctorOetker 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | its not like all the RAM is passing the same machine, they can gradually increase machines and observe the change in demand, and smoothly match it. | | |
| ▲ | AnthonyMouse 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | If they gradually increase production capacity then prices stay high for 10+ years (or for as long as it takes for demand to crash) because a gradual increase in production takes that long for them to add enough capacity for current demand. If they add enough capacity to meet current demand quickly then if demand crashes they still have billions of dollars in loans used to build capacity for demand that no longer exists and then they go bankrupt. The biggest problem is predicting future demand, because it often declines quickly rather than gradually. | | |
| ▲ | DoctorOetker 32 minutes ago | parent [-] | | do we have evidence of RAM manufacturers going bankrupt? do we have evidence that the increased capacities after the mentioned past shortages went unused or were operated at a loss? |
|
|
|
|
