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: Fred Fahmy who wrote (64805)	7/11/1999 11:57:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579954

FF, <I know exactly what predatory pricing is....and it's not Intel cutting prices to stay in line with AMD.> Really? Who was that company that dumped to the low-end PC market the chip called Celeron? Exactly the same chip as their flagman P-II but priced 4 times lower? (Please don't tell me that they shaved off a $5 cache chips) <no one really (except perhaps Scumbria) believes that AMD can destroy Intel,..> There are evidences that there is more than one person who fears this. Your own open vocalizm on this (AMD) thread is a proof. No matter how you or lawyers would define the term "predatory pricing", it is clear that the success of AMD is solely dependent on destruction of Intel. Why? Because all Intel business model is based on monopolistic pricing. AMD presence poses the greatest threat to this monopolistic ability. On the other hand, as it is typical to a monopoly, Intel slowed down in technical innovation and cannot deliver any new design so far. That's why Intel has no other real alternative but rushlessly destroy any competition, and they are perfectly executing these plans.

To: Fred Fahmy who wrote (64805)	7/12/1999 12:54:00 AM
From: Kevin K. Spurway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1579954

Re: "no one really (except perhaps Scumbria) believes that AMD can destroy Intel " Maybe not destroy Intel per se, but maybe destroy Intel as-we-know-it? As in monopoly prices, huge margins, unbelievable market share, segmentation strategies that border on the absurd, etc. Your concern over exactly this possibility explains your presence on this thread. Re: "I know exactly what predatory pricing is....and it's not Intel cutting prices to stay in line with AMD." As far as Intel cutting prices to stay in line with AMD--this really is absurd. Intel sets the prices in this market. Practically speaking, it's pretty simple. AMD can ONLY sell K6 chips at some discount to Intel. Why? (1) The K6 is underperformed by Celeron clock for clock in floating point, therefore it is a less capable chip, which people clearly will only be willing to buy at some discount. (2) Intel has successfully established a brand name which has some value in the market. If AMD wants to sell even one chip, it's going to have to price it lower than Intel's closest competitor. That is a FACT. Now, Intel has gone out and priced its chips where is is unlikely its earning an economic profit. It's quite possible that Intel is even selling chips below the total (not average or marginal) cost of production. Given this, it's pretty obvious why AMD is swimming in red ink. There's really nothing illegal or even unethical about Intel's tactics, either. It's just interesting that there are many industries where an unbranded, higher cost producer still maintains decent margins and levels of profitability (albiet lower than the leader) because the leader has chosen to maximize profits for its shareholders by setting prices in such a way that it earns economic profits across its entire product line. Intel has chosen an alternative course of action. It may or may not come back to bite them in the *ss. The next twelve months will tell. Have a nice day. Kevin