>And what part of (paraphrased):
>"I negotiated a deal with Intel: We will buy Intel exclusively, and Intel will give us millions" needs clarification?
That part about who required exclusivity.
The Lenovo executive said that _the deal_ (that offered millions in exchange for exclusivity) was offered by Intel.
Clear?
Need more?
(541) [Intel executive] wrote into his Accomplishments Report for 2006: "Top 5
ACCOMPLISHMENTS in 2006: 1. Achieved 100% Intel NB CPU MSS in '06 in
Lenovo's full NP product portfolio, including […] branded notebooks sold
worldwide. Received Division Recognition Award at 3Q'06 BUM for creating
comprehensive meet comp response that enabled Intel to win two key "at risk"
Lenovo notebook refresh designs and maintain 100% Intel NB CPU MSS at Lenovo
worldwide. (…) 2. Reached formal agreement with Lenovo (signed MOU) on '07
deal that awards Intel 100% Lenovo NB CPU business in '07 and grows Intel '07
DT CPU MSS to […]%729, enabling Intel to increase YoY CPU volume sales to
Lenovo by over […]%".730
God damn lying Intel executives! Hey, I have an idea... How about we cross examine him!
Intel says they never require exclusivity.
WTF do you expect them to say? "Yeah, we required exclusivity. So?"
Maybe the Intel parts were just so much better that the OEM didn't see any need to waste time with AMD and volunteered it?
Why would they need to offer millions of dollars then to make the deal? Huh? Huh? Huh? (Answer forthcoming...)
I really don't know and neither do you. That's the point. Why not ask him? You don't want that because you're afraid of what he might say. It might blow your case.
Maybe AMD had real problems delivering? Maybe AMD was sporadic? Maybe there were quality problems? Maybe they didn't offer proper technical support? You don't know and you don't want to find out by asking. AMD's yield reports might reveal that they were capacity constrained due to poor yields and couldn't deliver anyway. There are good technical reasons to think that might be true. Why not subpoena their yield reports?
I just LOVE these little arguments with you, because it is always so clear you have NO ****ING CLUE what you are talking about:
2.7.2. Lenovo's consideration of AMD
(505) According to Lenovo's submission of 27 November 2007, in 2005 and at the
beginning of 2006, Lenovo experienced "problems of the Lenovo-Intel relationship
across all parts of the business." Lenovo considered that the "Intel platform brand
is increasingly not cost competitive" and "[o]ver time, Intel was losing the battle
with AMD on price and reliability."637 A draft Lenovo-Intel CEO Briefing
Document of February 2006 stated that there were also problems with supplies.
"Intel shortages in 2005 caused [a substantial amount]638 in lost revenue (...), […]"
Furthermore, […]"639 "Intel's support of Lenovo's marketing efforts was
disappointing: […]"640
OTOH,
2.7.4. Agreement to launch AMD-based Lenovo notebooks
(507) At the same time as Lenovo was experiencing problems in its relations with Intel, it
also experienced market demand for AMD-based notebooks. In August 2005,
[Lenovo executive] wrote to [Lenovo executive]: "If the AMD notebook product in
[geographical area] is what is required to meet customer requirements then we
should get the product announced and shipped."645 In September 2005, at an
internal Lenovo meeting to evaluate Intel's rebate proposal for 2006, Lenovo
assessed the competitive environment prevailing at the time with the following
comments: "AMD has widespread penetration";646 "AMD is Especially Strong in
Small Business; AMD Has the highest penetration in the market Lenovo is
targeting for growth";647 "AMD gaining momentum in Notebooks";648 "AMD
Gaining Momentum in the Enterprise; AMD technologies are competitive; Lenovo
sales teams are asking for an AMD alternative";649 "AMD CPU Prices Are
Significantly Below Intel; ASP [Average Sales Price] Gap growing due to Intel ASP
increasing while AMD ASP is decreasing";650 "AMD Gaining [geographical area]
Market Share; EXPECTATIONS: Large CPU cost gap will continue to drive AMD
[page break]
share; [Lenovo notebook product] will increase mobile share."651 On 13
September 2005, an internal Lenovo presentation prepared to brief [Lenovo Senior
executive] on Intel's rebate proposal, summarised: "AMD acceptance and share is
greater in [certain] segments in 2006; AMD continuing to drive down processor
costs; […]."652
Wowsers...
OMFG, I just reread the Lenovo section of the EC's decision... So much damaging, nay damning email evidence to ignore because Elmer says its hearsay!
ec.europa.eu
Please, go read sec. 2.7 to see all the Lenovo related evidence that would support their decision, if only it weren't about to be excluded because Windsock told Elmer that it's hearsay!
fpg |
