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: TimF who wrote (156777)	1/24/2002 6:14:24 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 186894

Tim, <Its not even much of a hint that anything is shady or underhanded about AMDs model numbers.> It's merely something to ridicule. It's not like AMD even needed Arthur Andersen to audit their benchmark results. But they did call upon AA just to give a little more credibility to their "QuantiSpeed" marketing plan. Unfortunately for AMD, AA and "credibility" no longer belong in the same sentence. Tenchusatsu

To: TimF who wrote (156777)	1/25/2002 8:08:57 AM
From: semiconeng	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

What proof. Your proof of dishonesty seems to be the fact that Arthur Anderson is somehow involved. Thats not proof. Its not evdience. Its not even much of a hint that anything is shady or underhanded about AMDs model numbers. Tim I don't know what kind of upbringing you had, or what kind of world you live in, but it has been my experience that past behavior is a VERY good indicator of current and future behavior. They're linked. Are you not watching the news clips of Congressional Hearings? They certainly seem to think that Arthur Anderson LLP is capable of lying and dishonesty. If you lie about one thing, you'll lie about others. The fact that Enron was one of AA's biggest Accounts makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to believe that the highest level members of the company didn't know exactly what was going on. Most likely the whispers at the water cooler made everyone at AA aware, as verified by memo's that are starting to surface, and the employees complete willingness to shred the evidence. Overall, with only 1 or 2 noteable individual employee exceptions, it doesn't seem like AA is too honest a company to me. When you condone dishonesty in one area of your company, you're likely to condone it elsewhere. This puts all of AA's dealings into question, and if you don't think that Congress is going to examine all of that, especially with the Democrats smelling blood in the Bush Administration water, then you weren't watching them in action during Clintongate.... More people are going down at this company, and by the time the "smoke" clears, nobody is going to believe anything that AA says about anything. That's the point... Semi