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: Petz who wrote (51494)	8/16/2001 10:44:40 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

John interesting observation about difference in pricing of various amd systems. It reminds me a 2nd hand story from Harvard business school (I did not go to Harvard nor did I study business) that was taken from real life and it tells the story of a store owner who was trying to compete against 2 newer stores close by. Since he was not getting that many customers he kept lowering prices and finally he hired consultant who told him to increase the price of his goods so they would be 20% more expensive than competition. He was just about to go out of business and having little to loose he increased the prices. In a little while his store became more popular than competition since everyone thought that his goods are better because they are more expensive. Now when you look at the chips that are vary from 900MHz to 1.4GHz but priced at the same level you get an impression that they are of similar quality that is 1.4GHz chip is not really that much faster than 900MHz. You can not say the same about intel pricing. Something to consider? Regards -Albert ps I do not think that amd should try to be more expensive than intel but OTOH .... <gggggg>

To: Petz who wrote (51494)	8/19/2001 3:29:44 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Petz: It is totally ridiculous that OEM's and retailers are pushing 1 GHz Athlon systems because they don't want to "embarass" Intel, when they could sell the same system for $40 more with a 1.33 GHz CPU. I don't understand why 1.2 and 1.33 Athlon systems don't outnumber 1 GHz and less systems by 4 to 1. And you won't see a 1.4 GHz AMD system next to a 1.4 GHz P4 system. I believe you are forgetting a couple of important points in your "self-proclaimed rant". - Major OEM's pay a lot less for Intel CPUs than small box-makers and SD shops do. (the same goes for AMD CPUs, of course, but the difference is not nearly as large). - Intel pays for a significant amount of many OEM's advertising. Naturally, this allows them not only to charge more for similar CPUs, but also to place certain demands on product marketing and placement in ads and stores etc. -fyo