Dale,
That makes sense, you have to stay diversified. I will cut my losses too, if Intel starts to unravel. My entry point was low though, so Intel would have to fall lower than 62/shr.
I am very diversified at this time. I am really playing the internet infrastructure game right now though. I see TREMENDOUS growth (even bigger than x86 or anything else).. telecom is the way to go.
Hey, we agree on that. ;-) Higher margins and more profit also probably wouldn't hurt AMD. <G>
True ;-).. Higher margins are always a good thing.. but with AMD concentrating on CPUs they need to cut the fat and ditch the "side" businesses.
Well, what has changed within the last two years for AMD is Jerry bet the house on the K6. He said so himself, and by all accounts that is one time he was talking straight.
Oh Jerry did the same thing with the K5, 486 and 386.. he just didn't say it publically. Remember AMD had something like 30% of the market in the 386 days.. coming out of nowhere.. could happen again.. who knows.. I don't anymore and that's the problem <G>
Anyway, I guess we will have a better idea after Intel reports. They will probably give an ultra conservative view knowing the threat of an escalating price war is very real.
Not only is it real, but it is growing too. Something a lot of people seems to forget is that while the "high-end" chips are relatively stable right now, it is only a matter of time before the consumer DEMANDS that those prices come down to. I mean if you can buy a PC for let's say $300 (half the price of the cheapest now.. (this is just an example)), they will expect the same thing to happen to the high-end.. or they will expect twice the power at the same price..
The achieve more computing power the general rule is:
More Computational Power = More expensive product to make.
Witness the cost of Xeon vs. Celeron.. or PII vs. Celeron.
Steve |
