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: Petz who wrote (200206)	6/3/2006 3:07:43 AM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

If someone could post the Handelsbanken report on Intel, we could verify that it was only reporting on Intel's ASP's and volumes, not AMD's. I have never heard of an analyst referring to an overall industry total ASP before, so I am 99% sure that it is INTEL ASP that dropped 40% YOY and INTEL VOLUME that dropped 21% YOY. Petz

To: Petz who wrote (200206)	6/3/2006 6:49:23 AM
From: Rink	Respond to of 275872

Re: The key factoid is that Intel's VOLUME DROPPED by 21%. First tx for that crystal clear analysis. Just like to add that I suspect volume dropped first, and as a reaction Intel dropped prices quite significantly to maintain unit share. Like you said AMD should have gained share significantly in April MoM, but might loose some or all of that gain in May and June. Still if AMD can maintain reasonable prices like seems the case now it should be in good shape for Q2 earnings. This apparent customer dislike of Netburst can only continue in subsequent quarters, which is bad for Intel as long as NGA isn't a significant enough portion of their units yet. Intel only starts shipping of various NGA products in Q3 so Intel's Q3 guidance and results will be bad again. IMO Q4 is really the earliest quarter that Intel might potentially feel an uptick because of seasonal trends and further ramp of NGA. In the meantime (both Q2 and Q3) we can get a feel of what NGA (everyone is anticipating in Q2, and will get a first taste of reality in Q3) does to AMD's ASP's and revenue. My guess is that added capacity is more than enough to keep rev above seasonal. Regards, Rink

To: Petz who wrote (200206)	6/3/2006 7:00:10 AM
From: cruzbay	Respond to of 275872

Petz: Thanks muchly. Good dissection work. Hope remains.

To: Petz who wrote (200206)	6/3/2006 8:02:11 AM
From: pirasa11	Respond to of 275872

Actually, given Intel's retail prices, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel did indeed lose 21% volume in April. At each price point, their price/performance ratio is at best equal to AMD's and at times much worse than AMD's. Newegg.com prices: P4 630 = $168 vs $135 for A64 3200+ and $106 for A64 3000+ (top two sellers in newegg) The 9xx series is priced reasonably ($200/250/350 for 930/940/950), yet if you are set on buying Intel, with Conroe around the corner, shelling out $200 for a D930 in Q2 which will perform worse than the cheapest Conroe makes little sense. That entire series is heading for the CPU graveyard on a fast track. At retail level, AMD has not been hurt by Intel. At Newegg for example, the $297 X2 3800+ is the best selling dual core CPU and the 4200+ and 4400+ are ranked in the top ten. Of course Intel is probably more aggressive price cut-wise with their OEM customers, so "desperate actions by Intel in Q2" which AMD management alluded to in their April call may be hurting AMD in aggregate. But there has to be some correlation between OEM and retail pricing, so the effect does not seem to be monumental. My take on the April call was that AMD mngmt would have been definitely upbeat for Q2 had it not been Intel's inventory issues. Judging by at least the observable pricing action that has transpired since then, it seems that their fears did not materialize fully. Given the amazing uptake of X2 series by the market and firm pricing, I am expecting an increase in sales for Q2 over Q1.