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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles R who wrote (4944)	8/14/2000 1:09:33 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Chuck Re...<<<<What you are looking for is a dog fight and I will not give you one. <<<< Chuck, here is the reply I had to Frank and your reply. <<<In AMD'S case, a delay in chipsets caused a delay in revenue from 2nd q. to 3-q or 4-q. Big deal, the revenue will eventually be recorded. > This analysis is quite wrong. AMD lost those sales for ever. A chipset problem free ramp would have been about 7-7.5Mu in Q2, 8-8.5Mu in Q3, 10+Mu in Q4. Instead we got 6.3Mu in Q2 and are likely to get 7Mu in Q3, 9Mu in Q4. Several hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues and profits which AMD will NEVER get back. This is BIG deal.<<< In a subsequent post I asked <<<Where are you getting these figures? I have never heard any announcement that their sales would have been 7 - 7.5 mu for q2 and would have been 8-8.5 mu for q3. If AMD has sold out every athlon chip that AMD has produced, AMD's production rate is the limiting factor, not whatever figure you want to make up. <<<<<<<< Chuck, if you were offended when I asked you where you got your figures, then you have a thin skin. Anytime anyone puts out specific figures, he should expect to be asked where those figures came from. You answered <<<<My estimate on what the sales could have been if the low-end sockets weren't lost to Celeron.<<<< Chuck, thats your answer, and based on your unbiased estimate you proceeded to lambaste AMD'S management for not making your estimates. First you have no basis for your figures even if the Duron infrastructure did exist; but more importantly, the infrastructure wasn't there yet and to lambaste AMD for not selling the Durons with non existant motherboards etc is mind boggling. Whats next, are you going to accuse AMD OF losing sales in the fourth quarter because the Hammer isn't selling yet. The Hammer won't be sold in the fourth quarter because it isn't developed yet, just as the Duron wasn't sold because the infrastructure wasn't ready for q2. You said <<<<<<<<Good planning beats being mystical. Planning at 1 AMD place was screwed up. <<<< And I answered What planning are you talking about? Should AMD have notified Via earlier, should AMD PLANNED to do the chipset themselves, and if so, which project should be put on hold, so AMD can allocated the resources. What should AMD DO? Delay sledgehammer for six months, the 760 chipset????? Just what is so damned important about the 3 wk delay on the Via chipsets that AMD SHOULD DROP EVERYTHING and allocate their resources to that. The simple truth is that all of AMD'S dURON AND t-BIRD PRODUCTION IS SOLD OUT. To delay the Hammer or the 760 because Via or other vendors might have problems is ridiculous. Secondly, the 750 chipset works with Duron. The OEM's prefer Via's chipset. Thats their right.<<<< That is the question which was posed to you and you have yet to answer it. I am sorry if you feel offended that I had the timerity to ask what you are talking about, but I will not apologize for it and I am still waiting for an answer. OOPs, I was supposed to be polite. Please,,purty please, tell me your answer. There I said please.