Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Paul Engel who wrote (29384)	3/3/1998 9:30:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (2) of 1572356

Paul, Did you ever try and sell lemonade as a child, say for a million dollars per cup?, all you need is one customer to nor read the sign. If you chart the average sales price and the % market served by AMD you can easily see that the price cust were pure and simple to deny AMD profits for the future. Intel could have kept the price high as AMD could not ship enough product to reach 5% share. You need not compete with such a competitor. You let him sell his 5% and you sell your 95% at $100-400 more per CPU. Each $100 is $4 billion right to the bottom line, if Intel sold 40 M CPUs in 1997. Direct profit to be divided among the shares as earnings. AMD would also make another $100 differential and would have made a profit had Intel kept the price high. So Intel is guilty of anti competitive practices on the face of it. There can be no defence, they want to kill AMD, and they might still do it if the DOJ hides it's head much longer. The idea that Grove was being nice to us by dropping prices is tooth fairy stuff. I know you have a vested in stock interest in not havibng the DOJ after Intel as the share price would crater at the hint of it. But someone must do it. Bill

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next