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: Joe NYC who wrote (201177)	6/8/2006 6:20:51 PM
From: jjayxxxx	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, I think it is Otellini calling the shots, and there is only one priority: to hold unit market share. I agree. In fact, from the horse's mouth (at 06Q1 Intel CC): Chris Danely - JP Morgan: A philosophical question, Paul. If you have the choice between sacrificing a little bit of margin but gaining back your market share, which choice would you take? Paul Otellini: I would take the choice that keeps my factories the fullest. seekingalpha.com Regards, JJ

To: Joe NYC who wrote (201177)	6/8/2006 8:36:13 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

"and there is only one priority: to hold unit market share." And there is good reason for that. The short term reason is that running partially full fabs is a disaster. But the biggest reason is that if the market break down becomes 70/30 or worse, then it is a tough uphill slog to take total dominance again. So tough that unless AMD pulls a long series of stupids and whoopsies, they can't regain their position. If they can't regain their position of dominance, then they can't impose standards, force the market to do their bidding and drain all the profit from the OEMs. They become just another processor supplier instead of the industry itself.