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: Monica Detwiler who wrote (165766)	6/4/2002 10:54:08 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: Here's one of your more famous predictions That wasn't a forecast, it was a possibility, suggested after reports came out that AMD was paying Fujitsu for Gresham. As it turned out, the reports were partially incorrect: AMD did pay Fujitsu a chunk of money for Gresham costs, but hasn't taken it over - yet. A point to remember here, is that AMD was almost certainly considering taking over Gresham. And keep in mind that AMD has a market cap of $3.7 Billion, while Intel has a market cap of $178 Billion. While AMD is one FAB away from having enough capacity to replace Intel in the market. Will that happen? Given what I consider to be a far better strategy for the move to 64-bit processors, I think there is a reasonable chance of that happening. But given the relative prices of the two companies, with Intel being 48 times as expensive as AMD, AMD is doing great, while Intel is sort of muddling along AMD has just released "killer app" flash technology, and will very likely be making spectacular gains in its flash business - some of which will come at the expense of Intel. AMD produces processors at about half the cost Intel does, and AMD's 64-bit strategy looks to be letting it (finally) get more than half the price Intel is able to sell processors for - in fact, the positions could reverse, and then where would Intel and its high costs be? AMD has long been at a substantial disadvantage to Intel because Intel could make high margins on dual and multiprocessor workstations and servers, and high margins on mobile processors for thin and light notebooks. They used those cash cows to subsidize their mainstream products when necessary, driving everyone but AMD out of the business. But now, for the first time ever, Intel is facing serious competition in every segment from a company that could, not shall, not will, but may, have the capability to produce 25 million of its 64-bit CPUS per quarter sooner than you think. Gresham is still sitting there, almost complete. Dresden was designed to be doubled in size. All the site acquisition, permitting, and infrastructure work is done. Expanding the present shell and putting in more of the same equipment is much less difficult and takes much less time than building a new FAB. Remember that each $1 invested gets you about 50 times as much of AMD as it does of Intel, while Intel only sells about 4 times as many CPUs as AMD does. And AMD has a business plan that stands a reasonable chance of reversing those market positions.