Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (83428)	6/14/1999 6:30:00 PM
From: Ibexx	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear Mary, I suspect the FabMktBabe - whoever he may be - is a regular reader of this thread. :-) Regard, Ibexx

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (83428)	6/14/1999 7:08:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, Don't worry about Camby, he can hold his own... It's the penetrating guards of the Knicks that will give San Antonio fits... What's the story on LJ? Jim Also, I understand PR Engel is a big fan of the fabulous market babe...<G>

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (83428)	6/14/1999 9:15:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary - Re: "INTC has previously stated that they were going to copper-based chips, a process which I do believe IBM owns, and a reversal of INTC's earlier position of saying that they were not interested in copper based chips. Consequently, one should naturally surmise that INTC will be paying IBM some heavy royalties, and thus it will be a good time for IBM's chip division." This BABE is as Clueless as ever. 1. Intel has stated for >2 years that they WOULD use copper on their 0.13 micron process. 2. Intel is developing their OWN Copper process - and they ARE NOT licensing the IBM Copper process. 3. Even if Intel used IBM patents, Intel and IBM already have in place a BROAD PATENT CROSS Licensing agreement. Paul