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: semiconeng who wrote (156882)	1/25/2002 3:59:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

You seem to believe that if they're dishonest in one area, then that doesn't imply that they're POSSIBLY dishonest in another area. No. The text that you quoted had nothing to do with auditors being honest or dishonest at all. It was more about the lack of long term importance of the audited data. Corporate accounting is vital to get right, or you can be sued. Performance claims about chips are easier to check (so auditors are less needed) and probably less important. My overall point was that just because they (AA) are dishonest in one area then it doesn't imply that another company is dishonest in a different area. but it's ok to be dishonest if the data "will soon become obsolete". No it's not ok to be dishonest, but since there is no evidence of dishonesty in this area, and since some evidence from other sources backs up the main claims, and since there is no real need to have anyone audit performance claims anyway, and since the data will soon become obsolete, its ok not to reverify it. If having AA verify the data was more then a marketing gimmick in the first place and if AMDs claims based on this data had not already been independently verified then I might agree with you. Tim