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: Joe NYC who wrote (151749)	12/8/2001 2:06:03 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

I remember it as well, and I remember saying to myself "BS" The discussion here lately about AMD yields has been an attempt to show that AMD's claims can not all be true. They can not (have good yields) and (be capacity constrained) and (ship only 7.7 million units). At least one has to be a known false statement. While the 7.7 million is probably true the false statement must be between the "good yields" or "capacity constrained". You must make a major adjustment to one or both of those to make the 7.7 million work out. Paul has shown that if you believe the capacity constrained claim the yields must be in the 27% range, which are a disaster. Others have suggested major restrictions on capacity. I have theorized that bad binsplit could be the explanation. One of us has to be pretty close to correct. When a executive of a major corporation makes a known false statement to analysts that has a material affect on company performance, there should be consequences. EP