To: Elmer Phud who wrote (212021 ) 10/1/2006 1:15:31 AM From: fastpathguru Read Replies (2) | Respond to An interesting perspective on the lawsuit that you will never hear here. Duke is an Attorney with experience in the area. I'm not pretending this is anything more than his opinion but it is an educated opinion and worthy or a read. BUT the real answer is that AMD has be screaming this for 20 years and Intel's VERY capable legal staff, some posters here included, are VERY aware and have structured deals like ad budgets that I assume, have been okayed by lower courts. ")production gives legitimacy to offering certain customers discounts? Does Intel have a special, more efficient fab just for Dell?deliveries , bulk packaging, or having fewer account managers per CPU sold. I.e. If conditions make Intel's sales and deliveries to Dell more efficient with larger volumes, Intel can pass on the savings due to those efficiencies on to Dell.Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered: customer meeting certain qualifications, not Intel gaining efficiencies due to larger volume sales.Intel may have in fact had exclusionary agreements with customers, but AMD will never be able to prove it because they weren't "official." (See: "The truth is there weren't any such agreements, in any manner formal enough to prove that in any way Intel used UNdue influence. ")uncompetitive vs. Intel's, and THAT's the reason Intel has been so dominant. (Certainly not because they abused their market power.)success of the Opteron , as proof that with competitive products, AMD is perfectly capable of gaining marketshare. (Gains that certainly have nothing to do with AMD filing a antitrust lawsuit against Intel.)
