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: Harry Landsiedel who wrote (109831)	9/13/2000 1:02:37 PM
From: bigja	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Don't know if the this has been posted.... SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY UPDATE September 13, 2000 SEMICONDUCTORS Richard L. Whittington Research Brief rwhittington@bofasecurities.com DJIA: 11183 S&P 500: 1476 Work in Progress We believe the tables have turned between AMD (AMD, $28.69, Strong Buy) and Intel (INTC, $62.63, Strong Buy){1} in microprocessor manufacturing execution. Versus a conventional wisdom of reliability, efficiency and performance leadership, Intel watchers have been treated to one miscue after another over the past year, particularly the last six months - chipset changes, motherboard/microprocessor and slow ramp of fast PIIIs. AMD, on the other hand, has been rock solid, but at 15% of overall x86 units, relatively unnoticed. In spite of forecasts to sharply increase supply of microprocessors this second half, reports continue that Intel is falling short of the mark not just for Q3 but for soon-arriving Q4 as well. Whether owing to "slower demand" or "low manufacturing yields", stories abound throughout Silicon Valley that Intel is coming up short as Q3's conclusion draws near. $7-ish 64Mb DRAM spot prices are definitely down and have clearly lost sight of $8-plus contract prices which suppliers insist have not changed but which OEMs are clearly trying to jawbone down. Reports of insufficient x86 processor deliveries from Intel even to tier one OEMs continue, and second tier/white box makers are clearly not seeing the allocations they'd anticipated. Our explanation for all this unexpected noise is low Intel production yields on PIIIs, speculated to have gone to a different stepping several months ago trying to improve speed and lower power consumption. With the recent 1.13Ghz PIII recall fresh on their minds, they've slowed the production process to ensure no further mistakes, thus sharply reducing the upside flow for this seasonally critical period. Because PCs still dictate the fortunes of 30% of the chip industry, these concerns weigh heavily on investor minds. As well they should. This is truly a work in progress.

To: Harry Landsiedel who wrote (109831)	9/13/2000 1:10:42 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Harry,<<<To me, chopping off heads for pushing the enveloppe can send exactly the wrong signal to the organization--i.e. get cautious. >>> For once, you and I agree. The reason why Intel is where it is, is its engineering. It is run and managed by engineers. You put your plan in place, and if something goes wrong, you fix it. Intel is not Eckhard's Compaq or Skully's Apple. Those were marketing guys who didn't understand engineering. If something went wrong, they wouldn't know how to fix it and would go on witch hunts. If there was something materially wrong at Intel firing a few employees is not going to help. Intel would have to undergo years of management study and recommended changes would have to be reviewed and approved. I don't think anything like that is happening at Intel. Mary