<< Yes, but your Athlon ASP is way too high. According to my calculations Athlon ASP in Q3 was only around $130 ! This means that they will have to struggle hard to make Q4 estimates. And worse Q1 will most likely be flat. So, no 10% Q to Q growth as promised. Also, the higher tax rate and higher depreciation costs will kill Q to Q growth. But with flat growth it will even reduce Q to Q EPS ! Opinions ?>>
ASP for Athlons = $180
ASP for Durons = $60
ASP for K6 = $50
Q Sales Rev ASP
Q3 6.9 621 $90
(above is the previously listed calculations)
If you shift the Athlon asp to 130, then the overall asp would be 79, so one of the other portions would have to rise to make up that difference. It's safe to say that the k6 asp wasn't above 50, so it'd have to be the duron asp that would have been higher then the previous estimate.
If this were the case the Duron ASP would have to be at 106 to still get the average asp of 90 that we know is true. If you'd like to use that example and extrapolate forward, then the overall ASP would rise even more dramatically then previously posted.
Clearly, I don't think the Duron ASP was that high, which means that the Athlon ASP must have been much higher. The first guesses were certainly reasonable, but maybe not exact, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Duron ASP around 70-75, and an athlon ASP lower enough to make the average come out at 90, but since Duron's are increasing faster, that would be an even better trade off for us.
In a way, most of this is moot. AMD has said they expect ASPs to remain flat around 90 for this quarter coming up (with a possible slight increase if I'm not mistaken) so instead of arguing particulars 90*9 mil 810M in revenue, now it just remains to be seen whether we can hit the unit number on the ixbt table. Isn't the 9M unit number a lot higher then guidance? (I thought guidance was for around 8.2M) |
