When your management theory starts with denial:

But the key thing, Watkins argues, is that SSDs are just too expensive, and will be for a long time. Just look at the MacBook Air. There are two versions of the Apple laptop, one with an 80 GB hard drive for $1,800, and one with a 64 GB SSD for $3,100. Why pay so much more for less storage? It's not a difficult choice.

"Realistically, I just don't see the flash notebook sell," Watkins says. "We just don't see the proposition."

Certainly. For the frequent flying executive, that extra battery life afforded by an SSD is meaningless. Right. It's even better when denial is followed up with patent trolling:

But in case flash prices continue to plummet and the flash drives really do catch on, Watkins has something else up his sleeve. He’s convinced, he confides, that SSD makers like Samsung and Intel (INTC) are violating Seagate'€™s patents. (An Intel spokeswoman says the company doesn'€™t comment on speculation.) Seagate and Western Digital (WDC), two of the major hard drive makers, have patents that deal with many of the ways a storage device communicates with a computer, Watkins says. It stands to reason that sooner or later, Seagate will sue -€“ particularly if it looks like SSDs could become a real threat.

And the translation: "We aren't smart enough to try and compete in that market - we believe a strategy of suing all and sundry will benefit consumers a lot more".

Sheesh - is Watkins taking dance lessons from the RIAA? Remind me to avoid Seagate products from here on out.

Update: Speaking of SSDs, look what I stumbled on within minutes: A Toshiba announcement of a laptop with a 128 GB SSD (Japan only at first, but still). I think Seagate is starting to quiver over the foreseeable end of the spinning HD era.

Technorati Tags: stupidity