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: kash johal who wrote (34017)	3/29/2001 9:52:02 AM
From: jcholewa	Respond to of 275872

> First let me apologise if you were offended by my > earlier post. I worded it very poorly. I must have been in a daze yesterday, as I totally didn't realize you said that until after I read kap's response this morning. No offense was taken for any period of time longer than three minutes. ^_^ > Intel was amazingly successfull with its dual segementation approach. I personally believe that part of this was due to the fact that there simply was no competition at the high end against Intel. This "segmentation" approach was in place well before Intel introduced the Celeron. Simply put (imho), the top two or three speed grades that Intel had introduced had no competition, so they could introduce a steep delta between the lowest of those high speed grades and the next lower speed grade. They could price those lower speed grades as low as they wanted (within reason), because they were making it up with revenues from the high margin, higher end parts. Now, I have said in the past that I do not think Intel will be unsuccessful with their low end P4+i845. Actually, in the message to which you replied, I pretty much said it'd be successful and dandy. What I instead suggested was that Intel's mindshare will be reduced. Right now, Intel has a comfortable 12.5% lead in operating frequency, but the computing magazines are constantly pumping the concept that the AMD chips are faster. Now, I'm smart enough to realize that this will not significantly directly affect most of the buyers. However, more and more often I am finding people making references to AMD and being comfortable with the idea of hearing them in mixed conversation. Last week, I met by chance the CEO of a company that sets up VPNs and intranets and accounting systems and the like, and this person is in the middle (well, more towards the end) of converting all his servers to Athlons and even a few Durons. That's sort of what I meant by mindshare. Yes, there's not going to be any catacalysmic shift in buying trends. But the constant barrage of mainstream media commentary does its part to combat AMD's impressive lack of advertising prowess. Put plainly, those magazines and their more frequent (than previous years) pro-AMD reviews will help the company to continue to gradually (and I stress the word gradually, because the effect is like the shifting of tectonic plates: constant small pressure produces slow but steady shifts, generally) increase their market share even though AMD is not actually taking an active role in marketing their own products. Believe me, I'm all psychotic about AMD's lack of advertising. Er, except when they do even worse by putting up horribly stupid advertisements like they did last year. I'm sure you read my message pushing for people to vote "no" for the executive bonus. One of my very reasons for it was because of this lack of pushing product to the public mindset. ...and stuff.     -JC