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 (169738)	8/21/2002 6:51:28 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

True, but if the alternatives are selling lower cost chips for $60, or higher cost chips for $90, the choice is obvious. Not without more data it isn't. What if you can only make half the higher cost chips compared to the lower cost ones? What if you can make just as many per wafer but the wafer takes considerably longer to process? What if it's somewhere in between? EP

To: Joe NYC who wrote (169738)	8/22/2002 11:12:07 AM
From: fingolfen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

True, but if the alternatives are selling lower cost chips for $60, or higher cost chips for $90, the choice is obvious. If that was an accurate depiction of the "alternatives", it might be true, but I believe you're oversimplifying here... First, there's no guarantee that AMD is going to be able to raise their ASP by 50% off the bat. Second, we have no solid measure of what the addition of three dual damascene metal layers (a total of six layers - three via, three trench) is going to do to AMD's COG. I don't look for their gross margins to be favorable...