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: Petz who wrote (66221)	7/20/1999 4:10:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1585499

Re: "The fact is, AMD did a very large favor for Intel by second-sourcing the x86 chips, which is why the original agreement was so vague about what AMD would cross-license in return. Many OEM's demanded that there be a second source for their CPU chips, and, without the second source, Motorola or even Zilog could have become numero uno." This is all very true but every business relationship can eventually outlive it's usefulness. When Intel had multiple fabs they were able to sell their customers on the notion that they had their own internal second sources and there was no need to fear an interruption in supply. AMD was simply not an equal partner. They made $100s of millions off Intel's designs so they were VERY well rewarded for their part in the deal. Simple fact is they were unable to provide anything of value in return and no business wants to carry deadweight which was exactly what AMD has always been. Witness the fact that AMD has never made an overall profit on their own, non-Intel design. Never. That's not the sign of a vital thriving company. That's a parasite. EP