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: brushwud who wrote (165830)	7/16/2005 10:39:21 PM
From: inex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Should this be legal??? Ephud, there is an alternate scenario which you did not consider... What if Intel's lawyers did instruct Intel that what they were doing was illegal, but, Intel did it anyways in an effort to sustain its earnings levels during a powerful downturn in the tech industry. Intel knew that AMD was capacity constrained and didn't want to get into a tit for tat price war. Especially with a company that could only supply 20% of demand. What if Intel decided that the cost/benefit of doing this was favorable?? Having followed both company's financials throughout the downturn, I have always marvelled at how big AMD's losses were while Intel still made Billions... You speak to others as though your opinions are fact, yet, you leave no room for the fact that Intel might have known exactly what it was doing and felt that the $Billions made extending their monopoly would easily pay the potential litigation expenses later... Would you risk a $100 speeding ticket in order not to miss a business meeting that would cost you thousands??? Sometimes breaking the law is the less expensive route...