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: Elmer who wrote (89432)	1/25/2000 2:53:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580264

Fudd, <that's what my dictionary says too, but I think the definition is incomplete.> You id1ot. You "think"! Who the hell you think you are? The whole panel of recognized people was working on these definitions, all academia and scholars agree, but you, Elmer Fudd, disagree! What an event! Now we all should try to stretch general definitions to suite our personal goals! What a nice idea of Elmer Fud: re-define a definition if it does not look nice to you! There is the established definition, and when people talk about the price war, they mean exactly what reputable people agreed upon, not what some idiot thinks to justify ugly actions of the company he heavily invested in. Read again the main clause, our home-grown philosopher: "successfully lowers prices .. to force .. competitors out of business." This is clearly the explicit condition for the definition to be applicable. AMD, by THE DEFINITION of its' size, cannot force Intel out of competition. By definition. When AMD lowers their prices, this does not fall under the established definition. Period. Therefore what Intel is doing all the time is the ugly Price War. By definition. Again. No matter how hard you try to reduce your discomfort about that.

To: Elmer who wrote (89432)	1/25/2000 3:15:00 PM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1580264

Elmer Re ..<<<Yes, that's what my dictionary says too, but I think the definition is incomplete. One cannot wage a price war from above, meaning that Intel's prices have always been above AMD's prices. Isn't it implied in the definition that a company must lower it's prices below the competitor's price? If there were no implied conditions in that definition, then AMD could be accused of trying to drive itself out of business by lowering it's own prices below cost, which it did for several years.>> I would presume that a company driving itself out of business would hardly be called "successful"