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: Petz who wrote (22469)	12/14/2000 4:21:45 PM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 275872

Petz, <You've blinded yourself with your double standard here. > I am not sure where this double standard thing comes from. I post a bunch of reasons why I have a problem with Jerry and you latch on to the most insignificant part of it and ignore all the guidance blunders that Jerry keeps making. <AMD's minimum miss is 4% (2% actual growth vs. "high single digits"=6% prediction) and maximum miss is 9% (0% actual growth vs. 9% predicted growth. Thats a slippage of between 4 and 9 % in 31 days. So the size of the AMD "miss" is 6.5% in the center. > This is BS. High single digits almost everywhere I have seen is 7 or 8 or 9. I have yet to see anyone in business call 6 a high single digit number. <From 4-8% to +- 2% is a minimum miss of 2% and a maximum miss of 10%. The average miss would be 6%.> Your average numbers not withstanding, In very simple terms, Intel would have met their guidance if the 4% number was met. <The size of the miss is barely any different from AMD's, but CRAIG BARRET REAFFIRMED INTEL'S GUIDANCE IN A EUROPEAN INTERVIEW 3 DAYS BEFORE THE WARNING.> If Barrett did this, it would not be a good thing for him. Could yous post the link to this? <In actuality, Intel warned 27 DAYS LATER than AMD and, worst case, their miss is bigger than AMD's. > I am not sure how you figure this. <So please show me the reaction you got on the Intel thread when you called Barrett "not trustworthy."> Please tell me how much INTC I hold and why I should care and why I should bother posting on the Intel thread. <EDIT - and BTW, AMD never reaffirmed the CPU count in November. In fact, most of the conference call was about flash.> My recollection is that Jerry said "there is no change to guidance". If he did avoid reaffirming unit forecast intentiaonally that does not reflect well on Jerry and amplifies the point I am trying to make. If there was an expectation set by AMD management that 8-9MU guidance has lowered before the warning the other day, I missed it. Did they? Chuck