SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 35.53-1.1%Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Larry Brew who wrote (27571)7/27/1997 6:58:00 PM
From: Fred Fahmy   of 186894
 
L. Brew,

You didn't strike a nerve at all. It appears that you are the one who is getting bent out of shape over nothing. The idea of Intel marketing PC's has been discussed/debated by me and others many times before on this thread in a very civil fashion.

This was your quote:

<I've no knowledge of Intel entering the P.C. business, but to me it seems a good strategy....>

I stand by my statement. I am glad you have no input into running Intel's business because I think this would be a tremendously foolish strategy. This is nothing personal. It is a disagreement over what is and isn't a good strategy. So I ask again, why do you think this seems like a good strategy?

I think it would be a disasater for the following reasons:

1) It would lower overall margins significantly.

2) It would alienate all of Intel's current loyal customers/distributors such as Dell, Micron, IBM, HP, IBM, CPQ, Toshiba etc., etc.

3) It would provide AMD and Cyrix much more leverage in penetrating these same disgruntled OEMS. This strategy would be a dream come true for AMD and Cyrix.

4) It makes no sense since the OEM's are doing a fine job of selling all that Intel can make.

5) It would obviously raise legal/antitrust concerns and at the very least lead to a drawn out expensive legal fight.

There are other reasons but these are a few key ones.

FF
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext