"I cannot believe that Intel is not losing market share to AMD. Look at all these accounts AMD has gotten into," said Fred Hickey, editor of The High Tech Strategist, a newsletter. He pointed out there are subtle warnings that post-Y2K demand for computers is not there. "Most corporations ordered [PCs] in advance as preparation for Y2K," he said.
Goutama, this thread has argued for weeks now, whether Intel had enough chips in the channels. Most have taken the side of GTW and now Dell, that they did not get enough chips from Intel during Q4. Intel, on the other hand, has said that they produced a record # of chips and that they simply could not handle any upside requirements. The thread's response is that Intel screwed up and just won't admit it.
Is it possible that the truth is not as black and white as this thread has tried to make it? Is it possible that demand for GTW and Dell was not there until near the end of the quarter and by that time, Intel was sold out....mainly to the likes of emachines? That corporate business was down significantly due to Y2K and that, more than anything else, hurt Dell and GTW?
I am saying this because things are not adding up. Why didn't GTW start buying Athlons before the end of the quarter? AMD had them ready to sell. Why is M. Dell sticking with Intel and not approaching AMD when his shareholders are ready to lynch him?
I am beginning to believe that demand did not become a problem for GTW until near the end of the quarter and when they went to Intel, Intel was sold out. That p*ssed off Waites because he thought GTW had favored OEM status and could get chips at the last minute. You have to admit GTW's media spin on the issue sounded petulant.
And since the shortage argument has been made, Dell may be using it to cover up what may be their real problem....not enough demand; a problem that may be bigger than anyone suspects and a major concern of analysts who cover the stock.
Any thoughts?
ted |
