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: kpf who wrote (221981)	1/2/2007 11:54:09 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>> I argued there is no fraud at all. OK, I'll take your word for it - the fraud part. So let me ask the question as straight-forwardly as possible. Did AMD ship a significant number of 65 nm processors in q4 ? like 500,000 ? or not ? The whole point of shipping 65 nm processors in q4 was to relieve shortages. It looks like by now the channel shortages of AMD processors have been relieved. If they got relieved by AMD shipping 65 nm processors, that is very positive for AMD stock price, (and negative for INTC). If the shortage was relieved by lack of 65 nm, coupled with drop in demand (so that 90 nm was sufficient by itself), or substitution by Intel products, then that is negative for AMD and positive for INTC. I don't think I can make it plainer. The subject hasn't changed. Maybe someone can explain the absence of 65 nm AMD parts in the market, without resort to saying AMD committed fraud or lied by using legalese language.