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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (93153)	11/29/1999 5:59:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, <Called Intel a monopoly, said their actions would eventually prove to be improper. Spent about half his time attacking Intel, the other half presenting AMD as the technology/performance leader.> Figures. Sounds like he's trying to take advantage of some of the anti-monopoly fervor sweeping the press. So let's assume for the moment that AMD is indeed the so-called "technology/performance leader." Does that mean that the steps they took to get there (selling K6-x at below profit) could be considered anti-competitive? ;-) Tenchusatsu

To: Road Walker who wrote (93153)	11/29/1999 11:57:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

John, Sanders is something else. Out of one side of his mouth he's proclaiming he's beating the mighty Intel, and out of the other he's proclaiming Intel's a monopoly? Wouldn't these statements be kind of contradictory, to say the least? Mr. Jerry Sander III was just on CNBC. Called Intel a monopoly, said their actions would eventually prove to be improper. Spent about half his time attacking Intel, the other half presenting AMD as the technology/performance leader. Maybe he's trying to go down in semiconductor history as the buffoon of the century. I'd give him a lock on that one. Not what I would call a "class act". Tony