I just can't understand why so many among us demand AMD IR to update guidence every time the stock goes down, are not these well known AMD market advantage enough?
... you know I'm not in that group. The problem isn't AMD, the problems are biases, LOTS of money already invested needs to be protected. I think most of those analysts aren't as blind as they appear. If they start saying good things on AMD, Intel is directly hit; AMD's succes is taken on the Intel's stake. Start talking too positively about LINUX grabbing some x86 market share, that MSFT is screwed because one can't devellop a new OS in a couple of months and then you see your MSFT portfolio cut by half; it was 40 billions, it is now 20 while your LNUX investment, say 1 billion, which is huge, may at best multiply by 5 for a 20-4 = 16 billions loss... you don't want it so you do your best to prevent the big loss, rather than pumping for the little gain.
But some day the reality hit, and some Intel-Dell misses estimates and get flushed hard time while direct competitor blows it out. All the bashing effort is ruined and must be redone harder because the credibility gets weaker. On the long ride, the confidence slowly raise and some day, the Intel guys gets caught playing the old DEC-IBM's market-will-follow game by a guy named sledgehammer and his new friend, Win2000x86-64.
Max |
