Epiniphrine Re...It's very funny that you think that Sander's bravado is "finishing it", it could very easily be argued that Sander's egomania and inability to control his inflammatory statements was a contributing factor to the start of the so called 'jihad'<<<<<<
I said Sanders was finishing it because Sanders is the only one left, of the three, and will retire next yr. at which time the Sanders era will be history. I certainly see no sign that Hectors is willing to diss Intel or its execs.
be argued that Sander's egomania and inability to control his inflammatory statements was a contributing factor to the start of the so called 'jihad'. I think that once Intel attained the power and clout to drop the second source requirement that IBM forced upon them it made economic sense for them to do so, no one can really blame them for that, but they didn't do it very fairly and I am not sure that I would have either if Sanders had been literally dissing me.<<<<<
While Sanders badmouthing exacerbated the rift; all Grove had to do was give AMD the 5 yr. notice the contract called for, and then he could have easily told Jerry to shove it. While some have argued that Intel was forced by IBM into the deal with AMD; the truth is that if Intel didn't like AMD, all Intel had to do was line up another license, which likely would have been easier in 1990 than in 82.
'I thought: Why would he do this to a guy who came to America after throwing Molotov cocktails in front of Russian tanks in Budapest?' recalled Skornia. 'Andy Grove must have picked up the trade press, read about those remarks, and said 'That's it.' It's clear that [the relationship] went downhill from there. It was clearly a tremendously imprudent thing to do. But [Sanders] just had to crow about the fact that he had a bigger market share and Intel was the 'inventor'<<<<
While it is easy to blame Jerry for Intel violating the agreement (just as it is easy for some Arabs to blame the US for Sept 11), the simple fact is Intel did violate the agreement, and whatever Jerry said is no excuse. There are other ways to get even without violating the contract. Please consider this part of Elmer's post.
The parties had fundamentally different views of the contract. AMD believed the
agreement created a partnership or joint venture under which the two companies would
agree in advance on products to be developed by each of them, avoiding duplicative
research expenditures and guaranteeing each a more complete product line. Intel, on the
other hand, saw the agreement as "little more than an armed truce," in which each
proposed second-source agreement was to be the subject of combative bargaining with no
continuing obligations from episode to episode. The arbitrator rejected both extremes,
finding that, "while a party was not obligated to act substantially against its self interest
in deciding to transfer or accept a part, there was an implied covenant to make the
relationship work which obligated a party to consider in good faith ... the purposes of the
contractual relationship ... and to negotiate reasonably to accomplish this purpose. If it
could not do this it should terminate the arrangement--as [***7] Intel finally did." n3 The
purposes of the agreement, according to the arbitrator, were expansion of product line
and savings on research and development.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n3 Intel gave notice of termination in April 1987, after AMD petitioned for arbitration. <<<<<<
You will note that Intel from the onset regarded the agreement as ""little more than an armed truce," Intel didn't like being forced into the agreement before the original was even signed. Also, if what the reporter says is true, then Grove could easily have given AMD the requisite warning in 84 and been rid of AMD by 89. I have no doubt that that would have shut Sanders up, if that was Intel's aim. Having their cake and eating it too was Intel's aim, and by 87 IBM wasn't that big of a PC maker, and Intel was powerful enough to do as it wished. |
