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: Road Walker who wrote (36275)	4/18/2001 12:29:36 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"and they are using "other business" to disguise losses in IAG, just to make AMD look bad? " No, they are pushing expenses to "other business" so that their core business looks healthier than it is. Anything else would mean their stock value would crash.

To: Road Walker who wrote (36275)	4/18/2001 2:40:39 PM
From: rsi_boy	Respond to of 275872

Would it not be reasonable to assume that who is low-cost provider hinges on what product we are talking about? And that production costs probably look something like (from cheapest to most expensive): duron (small die size, high yield) Celeron (small die size, high yield) PIII (same die size as Celeron, somewhat lower yield) Athlon (medium die size, high yield) P4 (large die size, unknown yield) Platform costs, and price to performance ratios are of course a whole other (sad) story. t.

To: Road Walker who wrote (36275)	4/18/2001 3:38:53 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

John F, re:"What do you think, that they made money in their "other business", and they are using "other business" to disguise losses in IAG, just to make AMD look bad?" No, I'm saying the losses in "other" are exaggerated and the earnings statement blatantly admits it by saying that "certain corporate costs" are "allocated" to the "Other" category. Intel had a loss in "other" of 741 million in Q4, so an increase in "other losses" to 1,041 million is "only" $300M. Since income before taxes declined by over 2 billion, it appears that IAG contributed far more than its normal fair share of deterioration to Intel's bottom line. BTW, I noticed in reviewing the financial statements that Intel restated the loss in the "other" category for Q4'2000 without comment. In the January 16 statement, the loss was (741)M, but now it is stated as (657)M. Petz