"Jonathan Cassell:

There's been some misinterpretation of the iSuppli press release regarding its revised NAND flash memory forecast.

iSuppli did not write in the release that Apple had reduced its expected NAND orders from 32 to 27 percent.

Nor at any time did iSuppli state that Apple was reducing the level of its orders from existing levels—but rater stated that Apple's demand growth will slow in 2008 compared to 2007.

This is a major event for the NAND flash market considering Apple's large-scale NAND flash purchasing.

This was only one of the factors mentioned in the iSuppli release that are impacting the NAND flash market.

iSuppli affirms the accuracy of the release and would be pleased to answer inquiries on the topic.

Please see the text of the release below for your reference."

And, while it's clear from the above Fortune blog that it wasn't iSuppli that mentioned the drop from 32 to 27 percent, it was iSuppli that used the words, "slash…drastically". And, that's what is causing the furor. How does iSuppli characterize a drop in predicted growth as "slash… drastically". This, Jonathan Cassell does not address.

iSuppli cited a revenue "slash" from Apple, not a unit slash. If Apple agreed to order as much memory capacity as last year – if not more – but they're getting it for a 55% discount, is the "slash" a bad thing? It's bad for the memory supplier, not Apple.

If gasoline dropped to $1.50 per gallon, we'd all "slash" our gasoline expenditures, but we'd drive the same if not more amount of miles.

iSuppli and others are inferring the "subprime crisis" is creating a problem for Apple. Apple does a ton of business overseas. The rest of the world does not have a subprime crisis. If anything, overseas economies are running too hot.

Apple's North American business, like that of HP and IBM, is becoming less influential to its overall revenue.

Fortune needs to find a better source, or do some primary research.

Now, can you find out where Apple stands relative to their $1.25B investment in the five NAND-producing companies a few years ago? Did they recoup their investment in discounted pricing, or do they still own a piece of those factories or whatever?

Save the last paragraph.

But I can help: Apple is not the typical manufacturer that wants volume in detriment of margins. Somehow, with their case-study supply management, they have been succeeding in achieving volume with margins that are unheard of in almost any industry. Some times, over 50% gross. And, with these memory price drops, I'm sure that is going to grow.

And that's the really good news for Apple – in a time of recession and consumer spending retraction, they are effectively managing their supply market and making for even higher profits thus securing buffering it better when it comes to hardships on the other end – sales.

More over, expect Apple to also manage its way out of the so-called recession / crisis by moving its products upwards to higher memory and sales prices. That's what they've just done with the iPod Touch and iPhone, even though keeping the prices. Yes, with this, they don't even need to increase pricing! In every way, the market is always crying for bigger memory and Apple is going to provide.

Expect the same very intelligent move with products that use SSD – MacBook Air, all future MacBooks and handheld Touch products. Although not exactly the same product/market, the SSD will eventually become as 'manageable' [by Apple] as NAND has been for the most recent years.

And that's how you can tell a successful company that will withstand no matter what crisis shows up ahead.

Believe you me, AAPL is the next GOOG!