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 (75254)	10/12/1999 8:16:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1574199

Petz, <Two years from now, Intel will wish they had paid more attention to their core business and not wasted billions on profitless acquisitions.> Meanwhile, AMD seems to be selling off parts of their company at various times (Vantis, the Sunnyvale Whitehouse lease, perhaps Dresden fab capacity), yet they continue to lose money on their core business. Two years from now, AMD will wish they had paid less attention to Jerry's "core obsession" with getting Intel. As for Intel's core business, I don't see them losing any focus from it. These acquitions may be a nice side distraction for the popular press who always hungers to report something out of the ordinary, but the truth is that without the success of Intel's core business, these acquisitions would have never taken place. And Intel continues to release a huge portfolio of products which are targeted toward covering almost every segment of their core business. If you call that "paying less attention to their core business," then I'd hate to see what you'd call "paying more attention." Tenchusatsu

To: Petz who wrote (75254)	10/12/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1574199

RE <<<Two years from now, Intel will wish they had paid more attention to their core business and not wasted billions on profitless acquisitions.>>> The day intc bought it, Level One was downgraded. Later I found out that what had been state of the art tech two years earlier was now in process of being superceded. If Level One is any indication, all their new acquisitions may be duds. ted

To: Petz who wrote (75254)	10/12/1999 11:55:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Respond to of 1574199

John, Quiet, let them buy, let them buy. Bill

To: Petz who wrote (75254)	10/13/1999 2:59:00 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574199

John, RE: "Elmer, re:<Intel earned $1.9 Billion. This was up 21% y2y and 7 percent sequentially.> This source seems to disagree with your Polyannish attitude:" Elmer's report doesn't include one-time acquisition costs. Yours does. RE: "Why should we ignore Intel buying overhyped profitless... companies" This is incorrect. According to Intel's CFO, in the quarterly conference call today, Andy said all of these acquisitions were profitable. You may be confusing acquisitions - with - investments into Internet startups. However, these have been profitable for Intel too: "One of the more interesting additions to this year's list is Intel, whose Corporate Business Development Group tied (with W.S. Investments) for No. 3, with a return of 633.3 percent from its investment in Inktomi ... proved that it has the financial and strategic shrewdness to compete with the nation's top-performing VC firms." redherring.com By Cheryl J. Myers Red Herring magazine supplement Going Public 1999