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: Dan3 who wrote (134737)	5/11/2001 9:25:07 PM
From: kapkan4u	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Nice post. Would there be a point-by-point rebuttal from informed Intel investors? Not a chance. Regards, Kap

To: Dan3 who wrote (134737)	5/11/2001 9:58:49 PM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

>Now that they've lost their ability to charge monopoly prices for mobile and SMP CPUs (the first 80% of their profits went when they lost the ability to charge monopoly prices for desktop CPUs) they aren't going to be able to make any profits at all - possibly for many years.< Mobile pricing is definitely roadkill. However, at best the small cache, 512K and smaller, Xeons will be impacted. AMD left an opening for large cache Xeons as soon as they cancelled Mustang. In fact, it is possible they will not even be able to offer significant competition in any of the Xeon market. To compete effectively in the Xeon market, AMD needs both large cache processors and at least four-way chipsets. If AMD is to halt the erosion in the desktop market, they have to eliminate Intel's ability to subsidize lower margin desktop processor revenues with higher margin Xeon revenues. Once AMD is a sufficient threat to force the prices of Xeon processors down, Intel will find it much more difficult to subsidize low end processors.

To: Dan3 who wrote (134737)	5/11/2001 10:17:34 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

The easy days for Intel end next week - that 80% profit drop you saw last quarter was before Intel was facing any competition in the mobile or SMP markets. Last quarter will be remembered as the good old days for Intel. How much of the mobile business do you think AMD could take by year end? I'd guess that with VERY aggressive pricing (still raising AMD's ASPs) they could get 50% of the retail laptop business and 10% of the corporate laptop business. That would be perhaps a 5% increase in total market share while cutting the heart out of Intel's most profitable area. Potentially devastating for Intel. Intel investors better hope that the AMD laptop solutions are not as good as Sanders would lead one to believe. THE WATSONYOUTH

To: Dan3 who wrote (134737)	5/11/2001 10:26:34 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan3 and Kap, You don't get it. Intel's microprocessor business is as profitable as it has ever been, probably more so on a unit by unit basis. Intel's problem is in their "other business", where they lost $1.041 billion last quarter. And that took their profit from IAG's $1.683 billion down to $642 million company wide. AMD isn't Intel's problem, and microprocessors are not Intel's problem. If Intel fails it is going to be because of a bad decision to enter the communications business. AMD has been missing so many deadlines that you guys think next week is some huge milestone. Intel has been performing very well recently, meeting projected ship dates. And the roadmap looks strong. Things have changed from a year ago, it looks to me that Intel has it's act together in IAG. So you can celebrate Intel's lack of profits, but don't pat yourselves on the back and think that AMD had anything to do with it. John

To: Dan3 who wrote (134737)	5/12/2001 1:32:42 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, Are you forgetting about the imminent arrival of the 400 watt and MHz Itanic? Scumbria