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 (16725)	10/30/2000 1:53:47 PM
From: fp_scientist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

I don't think this has been posted ... Merrill sees INTC price cuts --1:01 pm - By Tomi Kilgore Analyst Joe Osha at Merrill Lynch noted that prices in the "grey market" for Intel (INTC: news, msgs) products dropped as much as 15 percent in a week. He expects the company to cut listed prices to bring its prices more in line with those of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD: news, msgs). Osha noted Intel's list prices are on average 176 percent more than those of comparable AMD products. Osha added that demand for AMD products is good, and the company should sell out its inventory for the fourth quarter. Intel is losing $2.31 to $44.06 while AMD is inching up 6 cents to $20.50. www2.marketwatch.com

To: Charles R who wrote (16725)	10/30/2000 2:32:24 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Charles, <They know what Sanders said during the CC...that revenues for the year are expected to be $4.8 billion, that ASPs are not expected to change materially from Q3 to Q4, that revenues are expected to grow in the high single digits sequentially......sounds like a creditable forecast to me. > Sanders is talking about units being up well over 10% and relatively flat ASPs but single digit revenue growth? Why does that sound credible to you? Are you saying that Sanders did not say that during the CC? Maybe I misunderstood him but I thought he was projecting percentage revenue growth in the high single digits from Q3 to Q4. He may plan to have production of units up by more than ten % sequentially but like you said previously, he was not planning to sell all the Durons produced. <A five percent reduction in sales(as discussed in my original post) could seriously effect that forecast, lowering sequential percentage revenue growth as well as reducing Jerry's $4.8 projected annual revenue number for 2000. In addition, it could negatively effect estimated ESPs and overall ASPs.> Read the above. Jerry was forecasting a minimum unit growth of about 15% with no commentary on Thunderbird/Duron/K6 splits. At flat ASPs five percent reduction units would do nothing to change the guidance. Okay, depending on the split, you may be right.....I did say that a 5% decline in business could negatively effect ASPs.....not definitely. That does not change the fact that a 5% decline would hurt Q4 revenues and they would not grow sequentially like he projected (assuming that I am correct in my interpretation of his comments in the CC). <Should that scenario transpire, do you not think AMD would warn?....which is getting back to my original premise.> Hope it is clear to you now why your original premise was wrong. Charles, this is my original premise.... "If business is off only 5%, that could be enough for Intel to warn....and AMD too, if Sanders comments that Q4 was sold out were not true. " How is what you've said over the past 8-10 posts changed that premise? At this point neither of us know if business will be off 5% from the expectations held by both AMD and Intel at the time of their CCs. We probably won't know until near the end of the quarter. Further its my contention that Sanders gave enough forward guidance during the CC that AMD will have to warn if business is, in fact, off by 5%.....even with him not saying that all pc chips were sold out for the quarter. Given the above, I am missing what our disagreement is about. ted