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: bnsbhat who wrote (148217)	1/19/2005 1:30:15 AM
From: Elmer Phud	Respond to of 275872

bnsbhat Isn't upgradation to a better fab process continuous. Doesn't transition reduce cost over period of time. To be fair AMD should reduce cost every quarter as natural sequence. Sure but your competition is doing the same thing. AMD needs to cut costs at least as fast as the competition. It's not going to get easier.

To: bnsbhat who wrote (148217)	1/19/2005 1:50:58 AM
From: Buckwheat	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

S. Bhat, when you have fabs still using processes >300nm, it's difficult to use JV and continuous upgrades/improvement in the same sentence. At least 2 of the JV fabs are still using huge process technologies. When we hear AMD bragging about moving to 110nm or 90nm, we sometimes mistakenly assume that they are talking about everything. That's far from the case with AMD. I have to think that rubber dog $hit gag toys sell for more and cost less to produce than 350nm flash products. I now have doubts about how much control AMD has over operations in the JV deal. They seem to have done a lot of hand-ringing and talking since last January, but in reality little appears to have happened to improve the JV's efficiency and contribution to the bottom line. Maybe there were some hand tieing, small print, agreements in the JV contract that AMD overlooked. I just can't figure it out.