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: Yougang Xiao who wrote (106690)	4/18/2000 7:06:00 PM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Respond to of 1574386

Another thought: AMD has indicated that they may have a zero tax status through 2000, but that in 2001 it should go up to 31%. For the sake of argument, let's say that AMD makes $4 in Q4 (very possible) at a zero tax rate. They would need to make almost $6in Q1, a 50% Q over Q increase, to not see a drop in earnings (assuming 33.3% tax in Q1). However, with the explosive earnings that I am expecting, I don't think that AMD will make it through the year without paying tax. Pravin.

To: Yougang Xiao who wrote (106690)	4/19/2000 1:11:00 AM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574386

Yougang, <Your take on CC as well.> I think the thread covered the issues pretty well. Intel acknowledged in the call: - Packaging problems - Poor capacity planning (though the root cause here is competitive pressure, I am sure the management would have done a little better if they were not enamored with networking, internet, toys, etc.) - Competitive pressure This is clearly not the old Intel. This is Intel on the run - can't slow down the ramp to 0.18 because competitor will take even more market share. The game right now is being played on AMD's turf and Intel's management has no one but themselves to blame for it. I thought the conference call was the most subdued Intel conference call I have ever heard. Now, it will be interesting to see if the analyst action tomorrow represents the conf call. [clearly Edelstone's will not ;-) ] Chuck P.S.: One highlight was that Xeon grew sequentially from Q4-Q1. P.P.S.: I think the management has also lost credibility on couple of issues. The explanation about not losing market share from Q1'99 is funny when the context was losing market share from Q4. Also, how many people believe Intel was NOT managing earnings with equity sales?