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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yougang Xiao who wrote (62755)	6/22/1999 3:29:00 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571540

Xougang RE: "....depends on catching up with intc's huge market cap" Not to worry intc has 3,318,000,000 shares outstanding while AMD has 146,585,000. The market cap spread is huge, giving AMD plenty of head room to maneuver when stealing market cap. I pointed out Briefing.com comments only because the intc's longs are continually announcing to this thread how incredibly profitable investing in intc stock has been for them (and how incredibly unprofitable AMD has been). Apparently they got into intc well before 1997. ted

To: Yougang Xiao who wrote (62755)	6/22/1999 4:29:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571540

Re: "Intel holds the card to call the shot in initiating the peace! " You seem to be confused about who started the price war, if you can call it that. It was AMD who insisted on undercutting Intel's prices, not the other way around. It was AMD who decided to sell at a loss to gain market share, not Intel. AMD boasted that they could sell all the processors they could make. Why did they need to start the price war in the first place? Why do they continue it? EP