Re: but this idea failed. It could have been any number of reasons, but AMD may want to consider this, instead of competing with Intel head to head.
AMD tried a limited market strategy 3 years ago when it focused on the entry level market / mid-range market, and limited itself to no more than 30% of the total market (and at the low end of the market, that represents about 10% of revenues). Intel's response was to create the Celeron line, and to dump processors at very low prices into the limited segments AMD was selling to.
So AMD really has no choice but to go after Intel.
Fortunately for AMD, Intel's great engineers are undercut by Intel's arrogant and ignorant top executive level. Between Rambus, the bizarre IA-64 strategy (they just walked away from their greatest asset, their installed base, and are leaving it to AMD!), being late to copper, and failing to develop SOI, AMD now has a fair chance at displacing Intel as the number one CPU producer, and an excellent chance of becoming Intel's peer in all sectors at all price point, and at all profit levels. Since AMD's corporate overhead and general cost structure is lower than Intel's, AMD will most likely be making greater profits than Intel within 2 years, while spreading those profits over only 316 million shares. Intel will be making lower profits and having to spread those profits over 6,730 million shares - so that AMD's per share profits will easily be 30 times those of Intel. |
