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: kash johal who wrote (73445)	9/29/1999 2:11:00 PM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 1573216

Kash, <The only reason for it I can see is to keep Intel honest in the lowend. As you know Intel would prefer selling its Celerons/Cu/128s in the $100 range, this is almost 50% margin to them and gives them great leaway to slash the high end pricing and maintain close to a $200 average ASP.> I am a little torn by the "keep Intel honest" argument. I have thought about it before and not sure if that makes sense. Yeah, that would put pressure on Intel but would it help AMD? IMHO, the benefit to AMD is if the ASPs stay high across the board. From the marketing view point, the low-end is growing more than high-end today because of the disparity between low-end and high-end is large (low-end CPU at $40 and high-end CPU at $600+). If the disparity stays the same, or worse yet, grows, we may see the high-end shrinking further as we go forward. It is lot easier to get ASP of $200 for higher end products if the lower-end products are selling for ASPs of $80-$100. As a consumer, I would like AMD to compete at the ultra-low-end. As a shareholder, I would like them to focus more on business systems and consumer mid-range and higher. Chuck