Re: "But as we all know, thanks to good 'ole Jerry Sanders, AMD's continuing mission is to catch up to or surpass Intel in every aspect (performance, production, marketing, investment return, etc.). So if AMD is aiming to become the next 800 lb. gorilla, why judge it on the standards of a 25 lb. monkey?"
Ten, that may be Jerry's goal for AMD, but I certainly don't think it's a realistic one. Intel will always be around, and always be a competitor, and will probably always have the bulk of the x86 market. That doesn't mean that there's no place for AMD, however, which is what a lot of Intel people seem to believe. I think that AMD can be very profitable with 25% of the market and products competitive with Intel at the high end. I think that if AMD achieves this, we'll make quite a bit of money on our AMD investments.
Personally, I think Intel is a very good company, although right now they're getting a bit distracted from their core businesses. The stock performance over the last year has reflected this and has been less than spectacular. The fact that AMD is still even in the game at this point as a player at the high end means that either AMD is doing something very right with meager resources, or Intel is doing something very wrong with massive resources.
What I don't understand is sincere belief among the Intel friendly that since the stock has always gone up, it always will go up. This just isn't true. The people who post "My stock goes up every time Intel releases a new product, so get ready for a big surge" may be in for a big disappointment this time around.
Time will tell.
Regards,
Kevin |
