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: AK2004 who wrote (150879)	12/3/2001 8:30:25 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

albert re: IMHO, the advantage of capitalism, let say over communism, is that under capitalism competition provides natural incentive for development. Remove that incentive and what do you get, monopoly? I believe I already tried to address this point. The microprocessor market is very lucrative. if not for amd, then others would try for market share. Intel's position is to obviously try to compete for as much of it as possible, but they are open about licensing their standards, and allowing other competitors an equal chance at getting a foothold. I suppose that once the foothold is gained, though, that's when they become open game. I think the best way to compete with Intel is to target other markets that Intel isn't going for as much. via is supposedly having a lot of success in China with their value CPUs, and despite the performance problems, their CPUs sell well. amd, on the other hand, says they want to be the virtual gorilla. they are aiming for market share, and in the process, they are killing off exactly what made this market so lucrative to begin with - the margins. I guess you can say that makes PCs more reachable to the consumer, but it's not going to help amd in the long run, should they gain all the market share they want from Intel. their margins are small - collapsed. outside of what you can gain from the short term growth value, amd will become a useless investment as soon as they've beaten Intel. no matter what, they screwed themselves. when Intel competes against amd, they are not just trying to squash a competitor, but they are also trying to re-establish what made the microprocessor market so nice to begin with - the margins. once microprocessors get commoditized, what difference are they from, say, a toaster or a coffee maker. once margins get small enough, there isn't enough capitol to go forward and innovate. it becomes pointless. you haven't seen the average toaster or coffee maker innovate in the last 20 years, have you? what makes you think that processors will go forward, once Intel and amd are forced to sell them for $20-30 a piece? Regards -BMW