> Moreover, the supply constraint isn't likely to be permanent, and whenever prices come back down then Micron would still own the brand and could start selling under it again, which they couldn't if they sold it.
Why not just announce limited supply, then, instead of exiting?
This seems like a "automaker invests more in financing arm, because it's the most profitable" concentration mistake, towards an industry with wide concerns over intermediate term financial sustainability.
> Why not just announce limited supply, then, instead of exiting?
Because it would be a lie. The amount of supply they're planning to allocate to Crucial in the near future is zero. Keeping the website up as a place you can go and order nothing would only mislead people into thinking they should come back in a few days when they're restocked, when that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
> This seems like a "automaker invests more in financing arm, because it's the most profitable" concentration mistake, towards an industry with wide concerns over intermediate term financial sustainability.
Their business is manufacturing DRAM. Also selling it at retail makes sense most of the time because they get the retailer's margin too, but it doesn't right now, and that's the side business.
The announcement doesn’t say that they’re selling the Crucial brand. And it’s a valuable brand. So, I agree, they will wait for the bubble to pop and then start it back up. I assume the higher prices let them keep the operation around in mothballs and the employees working elsewhere in the company.
Why not just announce limited supply, then, instead of exiting?
This seems like a "automaker invests more in financing arm, because it's the most profitable" concentration mistake, towards an industry with wide concerns over intermediate term financial sustainability.