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: Amy J who wrote (127347)	2/13/2001 5:28:22 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Absolutely not. A basic rule of Marketing at every good company is, "unless specifically asked, never dispute misleading or incorrect information." Amy, I don't know. Maybe that's true WRT demand or sales estimates these analyst come out with, but yields are the holy grail of any semiconductor company. If P4 yields are not close to what Galvin stated, Intel legal should be all over Glavin. I'll go further than that. Does this guy go around quoting yields about any other semiconducor company? I seriously doubt it. I think he has an ax to grind. Back to the point of whether to contest analysts' words, I don't think you do it every time, or you'd be fighting them every day. But yields...another story. Like some of the other guys pointed out, Glavin may not even know how to calculate yields, so Intel ought to at least clue him in about that. Tony

To: Amy J who wrote (127347)	2/13/2001 11:34:17 PM
From: kapkan4u	Respond to of 186894

<Absolutely not. A basic rule of Marketing at every good company is, "unless specifically asked, never dispute misleading or incorrect information."> I agree. I would go a step further to say it is a basic rule of confidentiality. Disputing incorrect information can lead to an inadvertent disclosure of confidential information. Kap

To: Amy J who wrote (127347)	2/14/2001 12:12:43 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Amy,<<<A basic rule of Marketing at every good company is, "unless specifically asked, never dispute misleading or incorrect information.".... Only a weak company would feel the need to waste their energy correcting incorrect information. Strong companies invest their time for the long-term, building their company, not on short-term inaccuracies.>>> I basically agree. But, Intel is now not a good company wrt marketing and IR - in this, they are very weak. It is being run by accounting people. It is in chaos. People can and virtually say anything they want and get away with it. The problem is not entirely with Craig Barrett. Craig Barrett is in many ways a better manager than Andy Grove. Intel was never very good at marketing and IR. They were lucky in that they had the right product at the right time. Craig Barrett is correct in focusing his attention on engineering and manufacturing. And, my sense is that the financial team is pretty strong at what it does best - managing finances and controlling costs. What I don't understand is why Barrett does not recognise that marketing and IR require a different skill set and that Intel does not have anyone possessing the requisite skills to manage marketing and IR. Mary

To: Amy J who wrote (127347)	2/14/2001 1:31:47 PM
From: EricRR	Respond to of 186894

A company that has something really good going for itself, and is solid to the core, does not need to defend itself against incorrect information. To do so, would be to imply their core isn't solid. Imagine typical AMDroid benchmarking here... In response to the test results, an Intel spokesperson said PC2100 memory is not yet available. Regarding the higher AMD scores, Intel said the Pentium 4 processor was designed to speed through compute-intensive applications such as encoding, which leave users waiting at an hourglass prompt unlike business applications which execute their simple functions rapidly enough for end users. crn.com I wonder if Intel's (willimette) core is solid?