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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (44545)1/2/1999 11:36:00 AM
From: Ali Chen  Read Replies (1) of 1585522
 
Tench, <If you still don't believe me, witness the ratio of Pentium II ads to Celeron ads in the media (TV, magazines, etc.). It's about 9-to-1 in favor of Pentium II.>
I don't believe you. I don't recall 9:1
Intel advertising.
What I do recall is a deceptive combo
"Powered by Pentium-II-Celeron processor"
used in all local computer superstores.
You probably have learned too much of
fast reading technique and read only
the first part of ads skipping the end...
What I rather recall is a 2:1 advertising
in favor of K6-systems in local
newspapers.

<Now why would Intel advertise a Pentium II
upgrade for Homer's brain if they're going
to discontinue it?>
I don't know. Maybe because the current
Intel marketing has a Homer-grade brains?
The SeleronA in Socket370 must be three times
cheaper to make than the Slot1-PII while
the performance is even better. The only
reason for continuing advertising could be a
disbalance between Slot1 and s370 boards.
You know, board makers are not too happy
to completely re-tool their assembling lines
every six month in favor of Intel's squirms
to steer competition off road. Therefore there
could be some oversupply of Slot1 boards.

<Pentium II line is Intel's bread-n-butter,
and that it's sold at margins that AMD would
kill for,...> I would not be so sure about
margins. As it was widely recognized (by
serious investors), Intel has a concealed
program for labor compensation in the form
of employee stock options, and has to buy
back their shares at rate of $1-$2B/Q to prevent
stock dilution. If you forgot all previous
discussions on the subject, I can remind you
that the trick is that these buy-backs are not
accounted as operating expenses in financial
books while in fact these are the deferred labor
compensation expenses. Therefore the reported
profit become highly inflated while in reality
it may drop to NEGATIVE values in some quarters.
If you prefer to wear blunders on this
subject, it is your problem. But some people
call this situation a card-house.

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

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News