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: Elmer Phud who wrote (166145)	7/19/2005 12:29:28 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:"Consider the utter stupidity of claiming that the worlds largest Semi company would have a marketing campaign that wasn't run by legal. And also consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't make sure their actions were legal even if they were determined to be a monopoly. If you and I can think of it consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't think of it." Nothing really stupid about it. Intel marketing is very clever. Even in the face of a weaker line of chips they use capacity to maintain share. We don't really know how involved Intels Lawyers are in all of this. I would not assume however that Intel "could" not be stupid enough to violate antitrust laws. Wasn't Otellini in Marketing?

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (166145)	7/19/2005 3:15:09 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: "consider the utter stupidity..." Replace Intel by Microsoft in your entire post. Yes, utter stupidity is right. Petz

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (166145)	7/19/2005 8:50:14 AM
From: TechieGuy-alt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

And also consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't make sure their actions were legal even if they were determined to be a monopoly. If you and I can think of it consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't think of it. Not to jump into your "conversation" with Jim, but to address the larger point that it's "absurd" to think that INTC would not have devised marketing plans/contracts etc. to make sure they were "legal" has a few real world problems in it. Namely: 1. Intel surely tried to push the limits on what they thought were legal tactics. Obviously, Intel does not have a crystal ball that they fed a particular contract into, and out popped a LEGAL/NOTLEGAL flag. Legality of various issues can only be established in a court of law- not by the lawyers populating the marketing dept. of any particular company. 2. If you are pushing the limits, and with such a large company, they were (IMHO) on a slippery slope. How good were the saveguards to ensure that various VP's that were negotiating various individual contracts over the years, after the above mentioned guidelines were set, did not start slipping down on this "slippery slope". 3. What if the previously understood position of legality (by these valuted lawyers at Intel) got redefined by recent case history- a-la judgement against 3M and their bundeling of Scotch Tape with other 3M products. That was a 2003 ruling- practically still smoking hot off the press. 4. (and most importantly), the entire argument that X won't do Y because it's "utterly stupid to do Y- because Y is illegal or (immoral), is specious". Did McCarthy really not consider that he would not get away with lying on live TV during one of his "hearings"? Why did he not consider it "utterly absurd" and refrain from it? By all accounts, he was, in his mind, a patriot, but still got blinded by his enmorous power and simply started to believe that he was so big and powerful that he could get away with anything. The end justified the means. So IMHO, I reject this entire "it's absurd to think..." argument. TG

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (166145)	7/19/2005 10:36:51 AM
From: Tomcat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Stop and try to be lucid for a moment. Consider the utter stupidity of claiming that the worlds largest Semi company would have a marketing campaign that wasn't run by legal. And also consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't make sure their actions were legal even if they were determined to be a monopoly. If you and I can think of it consider the utter stupidity of thinking that Intel didn't think of it. Think of the utter stupidity of what Martha Stewart did, or the utter stupidity of Worldcom or Adelphia or ... oh never mind.