Q&A with Micron's VP and GM of Memory

zzdw 3 days ago 11 commentsRead Article on morethanmoore.substack.com

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

25% Positive

Analyzed from 607 words in the discussion.

Discussion (11 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ironbound•about 4 hours ago

Save your time, has Zero details on the DRAM shortages and price hikes.

rvz•about 3 hours ago

This is the Micron top signal.

wewewedxfgdf•about 3 hours ago

Here's a question for the VP:

"Are memory manufacturers a tight oligopoly engaging in tacit price collusion?"

jdw64•about 3 hours ago

Usually, companies like Apple are largely to blame. [1]The memory market is said to be an oligopoly on the supply side, but Apple's low pricing and poor margins led to a halt in industry investment. In fact, there were reports in my country, Korea, that SK Hynix was cutting back on electricity usage.(during the downcycle, that is.)

The problem is that while AI has increased memory consumption and brought an upcycle, during the downcycle, mega-buyers like Apple caused various issues, and the production equipment that was scaled back during that time is now leading to supply shortages in the upcycle [2]. Apple fans probably won't admit it, though.

The memory industry itself has a characteristic where even a slight drop in demand causes prices to plummet, and even a slight shortage in supply causes prices to skyrocket. Elpida is a classic example. It's a structure where a company that loses in competition simply cannot survive by staying small.

[1] https://www.eetimes.com/apple-accused-of-nand-price-manipula...

[2] https://9to5mac.com/2026/06/25/micron-exec-suggests-apples-a...

rudedogg•29 minutes ago

Any thoughts on the latest price fixing allegations?: https://en.sedaily.com/international/2026/06/29/samsung-sk-h...

jdw64•22 minutes ago

It's a 'allegations,' right? It's not a 'verdict,' is it? I'm not American, so I'm not sure, but in the US, are 'It's a 'allegations,' right? It's not a 'verdict,' is it? I'm not American, so I'm not sure, but in the US, are 'suspicion' and 'confirmation' legally interpreted the same way? I'm genuinely asking because I don't know.

There are also cases where other companies back consumer lawsuits, right? In the end, I don't think it's too late even after a verdict comes out, but you might think differently. Here's my take:

In any case, both Apple and Micron are corporations. Both are capitalists, so they're not virtuous and they act in their own self-interest. The question is which side should bear more responsibility.

In my case, I think Apple bears more responsibility. You, on the other hand, seem to think the supplier's responsibility is greater. Either way, I respect your opinion.

seemaze•39 minutes ago

Explain how this works when their phones only capture roughly 20% market share, and their computers only 10%. That is to say nothing of the demand for server memory.

It seems like they only represent a fraction of the demand side, but wield an outsized influence over supply?

jdw64•33 minutes ago

In the commodity raw materials market, marginal price determination is highly volatile. Usually, even if total market supply exceeds demand by just 5% to 10%, prices crash dramatically. In the end, the 10–20% that Apple holds is the casting vote. Why do you think swing states are so important in elections?

m4rtink•about 2 hours ago

Seems like the problem is that Apple is so big it's putting the market under an unhealthy pressure. Kinda reminds my of big supermarket chains pressuring farmers to sell their stock with low to no margin by being the main buyers.

Seems very similar with Apple, using their closed technology to maintain an oligopoly position, which makes them able to pressure suppliers and perverse the market.

objclxt•about 2 hours ago

> Usually, companies like Apple are largely to blame

Just as a point of fact, Micron and its peers have in the past operated an illegal cartel that engaged in a price fixing conspiracy to manipulate the cost of RAM.

> mega-buyers like Apple caused various issues, and the production equipment that was scaled back during that time is now leading to supply shortages in the upcycle [2]. Apple fans probably won't admit it, though.

That's Micron's problem. Nobody held a gun to their heads and made them accept the prices Apple was offering. Micron willingly took those deals.

jdw64•about 2 hours ago

It's true that memory companies formed a cartel in the early 2000s, and I'm not saying the memory companies did nothing wrong.

It's just that in the context of the current price surge, the biggest factor varies depending on how you look at it, but hardware manufacturing itself has problems with fixed-cost structures and demand monopolies. It's a problem of sunk costs. If fab utilization drops, losses pile up. In other words, a fab has to run 24/7.

So the problem is that if a fab stops running, astronomical losses begin, so it's natural to hesitate in investing in production facilities. And that hesitation is driven by fundamental issues of supply and demand. That's also why memory became expensive.

Ultimately, it seems you agree that the current prices were formed by these voluntarily created conditions, right?