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 (156798)	1/24/2002 10:41:06 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

This exercise is a complete non-brainer And such is Elmer's problem. No brain. What a dope! THE WATSONYOUTH

To: Joe NYC who wrote (156798)	1/24/2002 11:41:57 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

This exercise is a complete non-brainer, since just the executive salaries alone (more or less a definition of one of the fixed costs) surpasses the loss. This is just to start. Add 161 million R&D to fixed costs etc. You get the point. Yes you're right, I understand your point but AMD is in a position where the entire output of their fab is incapable of generating enough revenue to post a profit in a quarter of unfulfilled demand and capacity constrain for their competition. It has been suggested here that AMD held back capacity (despite their claims of being at 100% capacity) to keep ASPs up, in which case additional wafers would have harmed ASPs to the extent that total revenue would have suffered. If true then in that case the "phrase start more wafers lose more money" would be true. Otherwise your point about fixed costs is valid and I spoke too quickly. EP