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: pirasa2 who wrote (238487)	8/9/2007 1:42:38 PM
From: pgerassi	Respond to of 275872

Dear Pirasa2: I did do a search and the Mercury report did not come up. Perhaps it was pulled. Your Axioms just shows that you set the results you want to see and then try to manipulate things until it comes out that way. The scientific method doesn't work that way. And Intel used to get >$200 for notebook chips back when they could use illegal tactics to suppress AMD and others from getting in that end of the business. They got those $200 ASPs and handed some of that back under the table. And before that AMD did get $100 ASPs for notebook chips in the 1990s. So both axioms are wrong. That is why they say that "Assumptions are the mother of all F****UPS! Pete

To: pirasa2 who wrote (238487)	8/9/2007 1:45:01 PM
From: graphicsguru	Respond to of 275872

Pirasa, don't be so hard on Pete for that post. Unlike most of his posts, it was understandable. Dead wrong, but I was actually able to follow it. And he didn't blather on about 4S systems that had nothing to do with the subject. Those are both improvements. It's just that Pete doesn't understand that OEMs have margins. And that margins on upgrades are much higher than margins on base configurations. For amusement, we could apply his methodology to memory upgrades. I'm sure we could "prove" that Dell pays twice the retail price for DRAM modules.