Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 34.70

-1.1%

1:18 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: nihil who wrote (92555)	11/15/1999 11:14:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Re: "To be labeled an abusive monopolist Intel does not have to run AMD out of business. It is enough that it injure competition, or that AMD be prevented from competing at a profit. Intel ought to watch its step. Even a refusal to extend a technology agreement with AMD could be considered an attempt to destroy a competitor. It is well for Intel to have a profitable competitor, at least until competition to the knife is accepted by the the SCt. " Nihil, I cannot accept your analysis. Based on the above, if AMD were so incompetent that it cannot manufacture it's products at a cost anywhere near competitive with Intel, Intel must raise it's prices so as not to drive AMD out of business, even if Intel could market it's products at a lower cost and still remain profitable. This does not serve the consumer but simply keeps a deadbeat company alive on consumer funded life support. I simply don't believe that the law requires a potential monopolist to raise prices to the point that it does not injure an incompetent competitor. EP

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next