John - Re: "Some how this foul up on Intel's part doesn't fit with company I've been watching for all these years. '
Why does everyone assume that Intel "fouled up" with Gateway?
If Gateway, for example, forecasted for, say, 75,000 450 MHz Pentium IIs/week in August, and Intel scheduled their factories for that number (remember, Intel's process time is about 9 to 11 weeks), and in early November Gateway UPS THEIR request to 125,000 450 MHz Pentium IIs/week , what can Intel do? Especially, when Dell, Compaq, HP, Sony, etc were most likely ALSO asking for increased delivery allotments ?
So, is Intel to blame in this case ?
Absolutely not.
Gateway had the option - as it always does - to buy CPUs and keep them in inventory. Instead, they chose to reduce THEIR costs and let Intel bear the burden of holding CPUs in Intel's Inventory. When Intel's inventory ran dry - and I think they hinted at this in the October Conference Call - Gateway was SOL in their attempt to get larger deliveries from Intel than were initially forecasted by Gateway.
So - did Gateway blame their procurement personnel for NOT ORDERING SUFFICIENT CPUS in time from Intel ?
Why not ?
Paul |
