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: Dan3 who wrote (165785)	6/5/2002 8:46:00 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

while Intel is sort of muddling along I bet most companies wish they could "muddle along" like INTC has done.....LOL 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. Your numbers are meaningless for the simple fact that INTC has proven the ability to earn money(and a lot of it!) over time while AMD has not. BK

To: Dan3 who wrote (165785)	6/5/2002 11:15:10 AM
From: fingolfen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

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. rotflmao You DON'T seriously believe that, do you? This entire post seems to be written from the perspective of a wearer of very rose colored glasses, with very limited knowledge of the ins and outs of the semiconductor business. I'll hit a few high points. 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 What color is the sky in your world? Intel remained profitable during one of the worst downturns in the tech industry, and did so without major layoffs, while AMD reverted to losses. I don't see any basis for this statement. 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. So you go from an outright statement above... to a waffle. You can't play both sides of the fence. What is it? 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. That's not correct. Often times it's more cost effective to start over than to try to modify an existing structure. Intel has had to abandon several older fabs simply because they could not be brought up to current standards. Also, by and large it's very difficult to convert a fab to 300mm unless it was designed for 300mm from the outset.