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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (146456)	10/31/2001 2:55:58 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

Ten, Re: Albert, <it does not bother you that Intel expected cost saving are only 25% from new process while most expected ~80%? ... looks like my intel investment may not pay off after all> >>Seems like Paul should go after you instead of Dan for being a pathological liar. Ten, an old expression that I never liked the wording of, but it is the one always used in this case: Take it for the source from whence it came. Tony

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (146456)	10/31/2001 2:56:41 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten re: being a pathological liar. here is from SSB report: * The one area we thought not as positive as it could have been was management's forecast of a 25% cost savings on processors over the next two years as it converts six fabs over to 0.13um processes by the end of 2002, and brings on two 300mm fabs next year. It suggested Q4 was the peak in manufacturing cost. By and large, we would expect at least a 40%-50% savings from a shrink, while the theoretical savings from the conversion from 200mm to 300mm is supposed to be 80%. Should I expect apology from you? neah, intelabee can not be wrong by definition and can insult at will, the right of the royalty -Albert