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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (80563)	5/23/2002 7:12:24 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: From a manufacturing base that's now out of date and still should be capable of 15 million+ per quarter. So Intel, spending 8 times as much on its FABs, with 8 times as much space for CPUs, should be capable of 120 million+ per quarter, right? How come they can only make about 40?

To: Elmer who wrote (80563)	5/23/2002 7:18:18 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

They have? Is that why HP,Compaq, IBM, Dell, NEC, etc committed to IA64 while nobody has committed to Hammer? I see you avoided saying "are committed" because as you are aware, many of those names have both committed and then decommitted. Try searching Dell's website for an Itanium system. This is the level of commitment they have. Currently, the target date for these systems is sometime in the second half of 2000; however, this date depends on availability of the Intel® ItaniumTM processor, the chip set, and software. And IBM don't look too keen any more. Message 17505620 Compaq have stepped aside to let HP deliver their Itanium system. HPs system is developed by NEC. So it all boils down to just HP left on your list. And they are going to be the last to drop it, given their involvement in its inception. Sorry, but it sure looks like a slow death to me.

To: Elmer who wrote (80563)	5/23/2002 9:55:30 PM
From: TechieGuy-alt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

So in other words you have no data whatsoever but you've bought the hype. You're the one buying the stock. ATM I have 0 position in AMD. Yes, and i've read your "book value as floor, I'm collecting CC premiums" hypothesis. But you claim that AMD's manufacturing technology is "old". and they can't keep up on the process and technology side. You of all folks must know that the value carried on the books can be vastly different from "fire sale" value on the second hand junk market. In the past AMD's stock dropped substantially below book whenever they have had manufacturing problems (0.6-0.7x book). So you are easily looking at a $6-$7 real floor possibility- essentially a 50% haircut from present levels. Quite a chance your're willing to take to grab the extra premiums on AMD CC's! You entire story on your current position and your opinion on AMD's competitive position vis-a-vis process and tech does not pass the "sanity" test. Of course, if you already know of Intel's plans and capabilities in the near future and have a good idea of AMD's real capabilities of process and product technologies, your position, if one ignores your statements, makes more logical sense. TG