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: Paul Engel who wrote (138346)	6/29/2001 12:49:51 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Although the two companies compete in many of the same markets, they have business plans with one primary difference: Intel hopes for ASPs of $200 (which it succeeded in receiving for years) and needs ASPs around $150. AMD hopes for ASPS of $100 and needs ASPs of around $75. Recent pricing for products from each company that compete in the marketplace: Product Price Intel / AMD Intel / AMD P4 1.7 / A MP1.2 $324 / $229 P4 1.5 / A1.4 $218 / $163 P4 1.4&P3 1 / A1.3 $167 / $125 P4 1.3&P3.9 / A1.2 $155 / $97 P3 866 / A1.1 $134 / $91 Cel 850 / D950 $84 / $79 Cel 800 / D900 $60 / $60 Cel 766 / D850 $54 / $47 Intel needs ASPs twice those of AMD - and it certainly is getting higher ASPs, especially since (for the most part), it has the mobile and SMP markets to itself until next quarter, but generally I think AMD is doing better in terms of meeting its goals for ASPs. AMD isn't dragging along the baggage of Intel's "other" divisions, and its management doesn't feel the need to build a new pyramid (FAB) each year to proclaim its glory. Next quarter AMD will be a significant player in the mobile market. Towards the end of the year, AMD will be putting a little bit of pressure on the low end server market. I think AMD will continue to be a fairly fast growing, profitable company - but its growth won't be explosive and its earnings won't be spectacular. Intel, on the other hand, has a problem. Computers aren't the novelty they once were, most markets (other than the very low end markets) are replacement markets, and buyers have learned it isn't necessary to pay the $200 ASPs Intel was used to. That's a lesson they aren't likely to un-learn. They may not even pay the $150 ASPs Intel needs to continue in its present form.