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: Process Boy who wrote (90011)	1/27/2000 2:29:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574269

PB, RE:"This is the semiconductor industry. Cyclical capacity issues have appeared to me to be an inherent part of doing business in my close to 20 years doing this stuff" Hard for me to believe that Intel didn't plan for more than a 3% increase in chip demand year over year, Q4. Something else went wrong...like rough launch. <G> Jim

To: Process Boy who wrote (90011)	1/27/2000 4:12:00 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574269

To be this smart, Intel would have had to make decisons regarding outlay of capital a matter of YEARS ago. Most companies do make just such decisions years in advance....I think you need to accept the fact that upper mgmt at Intel has not been too focused on the CPU portion of the business. This is the semiconductor industry. Cyclical capacity issues have appeared to me to be an inherent part of doing business in my close to 20 years doing this stuff. To be honest the only semi that seems to have this serious a problem is Intel....even the fabless semis do not seem to be straining this much. No excuse. Just the way it is. So long as industry people like you believe that it has to be this way, most likely it will remain that way. Just a thought. ted

To: Process Boy who wrote (90011)	1/28/2000 8:44:00 AM
From: Kevin K. Spurway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574269

Re: "To be this smart, Intel would have had to make decisons regarding outlay of capital a matter of YEARS ago." One of the things a successful monopolist does in order to remain successful is to keep excess capacity available for these types of situations. The cost of the excess capacity is subsidized by PART of the monopolist's higher-than-market profits. The reason monopolists make this choice is so that their customers never have any reason to go out and cultivate second sources. That's how you stay in business as a monopoly (a nice situation to be in). Intel messed this up. Kevin