Show me an actual criticism of the ruling. Not a political rant or a parroting of Intel talking points that ignore the ruling... An actual criticism of the ruling.
There's your escape clause. No matter what the source you'll just call it a parroting of Intel talking points. The point is that Intel's talking points are shared by many outside the posters here. You're the delusional one.
You told me you could show me criticism of the ruling.
NOT ONE OF THESE LINKS IS A CRITICISM OF THE ACTUAL RULING.
They criticize strawman versions of the ruling, if they even bother to look like they're referring to its specifics.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-shapiro/eu-intel-fine-and-new-doj_b_203895.html
"a payment which will simply fund the EU government and do nothing for consumers or competition."
Dismissal of the conclusions and rationale of the decision, with zero basis for that dismissal. (Followed by more baseless dismissal.)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090519.wreynolds0520/BNStory/Technology/home
"In Intel's case, the EU commission didn't bother to specify which Intel marketplace practice was not fair."
Wrong. They specified it quite clearly.
http://www.uschamber.com/press/releases/2009/may/090513_antitrust.htm
“Fines by the Commission have escalated in size in recent years, raising serious concerns about due process and the method for determining these huge fines,”
Where's the criticism? All I see is "concern" over the magnitude of the numbers.
http://business.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=102009F6EQ4I
"Forcing Intel to stop offering those discounts, King reasoned, could lead to higher prices."
Higher Intel prices maybe. Unless they take the gloves off... (LOL) An example of accepting some aspects of the ruling, and ignoring others*. Also a verbatim Intel Talking Point.
http://sev.prnewswire.com/computer-electronics/20090513/DC1616413052009-1.html
"The European Commission's efforts to manipulate competition in the technology industry without identifying actual consumer harm are worrying."
Stop right there, LIAR...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/1119
"How odd. A company giving it customers a financial incentive to purchase its products, rather than its competition's!"
Yet another ignoramus who can't read. (The rest is total political rant.)
I could go on. Credit to Tecate on Ihub for most of the digging.
Ahh Tecate, that bastion of rational thinking...
fpg
*From the Ruling PR: "Moreover, in order to be able to compete with the Intel rebates, for the part of the computer manufacturers' supplies that was up for grabs, a competitor that was just as efficient as Intel would have had to offer a price for its CPUs lower than its costs of producing those CPUs, even if the average price of its CPUs was lower than that of Intel."
(Soak in that last point... We'd see a lot less BS around here if the Intel folk could understand that aspect of an abusive loyalty rebate that has yet to penetrate the brain of any Intel booster.) |
