"Prudential may be accused of being over-optimistic"
It's all relative. In a world comprising "skittish at the best of times" AMD investors, any negative media sentiment, with merit or without, is too frequently met with a severe case of AMD investor angst.
Prudential is the only analysis I've seen that even attempts to reconcile current AMD progress/actions with the 33% marketshare goal in 2008.
Assuming current unitshare (as distinguished from Revshare) in the 20% range, that goal represents a unitshare gain by AMD of 1% per quarter, on average for the next 2 years. Obviously at the 50% level, Pru's top end, it's about 3% per quarter.
INTC has flubbed so badly with P4, that AMD has gained serious traction in all sectors, both consumer and enterprise.
Even if Conroe lives up to Doug's imaginative (at this time) heights, the burned bridges INTC has left in its P4 wake, not to mention its history of (illegally (?)) strongarming OEM's will not be readily restored.
Besides, Doug's best case is 40% Conroe mix in INTC offerings (or 30% of te market) by year end, which leaves 70% up for grabs assuming that, as Doug seems to believe, Conroe uptake will be 100% of what INTC can deliver to market.
No wonder AMD exec's are "cool" with their current plan (sandbagging (?)), because even in Doug's best case Conroe scenario, AMD continues to eat up share as no one wants anything to do with 60% of INTC's P4 mix, which as we're now witnessing, INTC apparently can't un;oad at any price.
So, is Prudential overly optimistic, or has the "skittish AMD investor" once again lost perspective amidst the unrealistically imagined impact of Conroe? |
