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: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (63478)	6/26/1999 12:28:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571455

Re: "Fact is that AMD can't ship anywhere near enough K7 to do any damage to Intel in terms of market share, probably for the next nine months at least. Given that this is the case, AMD woud be stupid to charge any less for the K7 than they can realistically get for it. Starting a price war is the kind of thing you do when you want to gain market share, and AMD is in no position to take significant market share with the K7 for quite a while." Kevin - Your argument would hold for any company other than AMD. It is the honest opinion of many that AMD's only goal is not to make the best business decisions, but rather to do whatever they can to damage Intel. The simplest explanation is usually the best one and this premise does far and away the best job of explaining the behavior of AMD for a good many years and it will continue to do so on into the future, as long as Jerry is at the helm. You think we're joking when we say this but we're not. What Intel really needs to worry about is that someone else will recognize the potential of the K7 and somehow take Jerry out of the equation. EP

To: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (63478)	6/26/1999 9:01:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571455

<Fact is that AMD can't ship anywhere near enough K7 to do any damage to Intel in terms of market share, probably for the next nine months at least. Given that this is the case, AMD woud be stupid to charge any less for the K7 than they can realistically get for it. Starting a price war is the kind of thing you do when you want to gain market share, and AMD is in no position to take significant market share with the K7 for quite a while.> Kevin, I completely agree with you on these points. I'm arguing, however, that AMD is indeed charging less for the Athlon than they can realistically get for it. Either that, or like Ali Chen said, the Tier 1 customers are forcing AMD to sell the Athlon at lower prices, perhaps in an attempt to get Intel to discount the Pentium III. Either way, a price war will be initiated. However, in the latter case, it won't be AMD who starts the price war, but rather the Tier 1 guys like IBM and Compaq who would benefit greatly from Intel and AMD slugging it out. And that would be costly both for AMD and INTC investors. Now that I think about it, the latter case sounds much more probable than the notion that AMD wants to start a price war again. Maybe I ought to think about this a little. Any comments from the peanut gallery? Tenchusatsu