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: fastpathguru who wrote (241959)	10/6/2007 12:17:59 AM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>> That being, Intel is accused of tailoring their rebates such that AMD is excluded, If you didn't know, the EU competition commission did not declare Coke's explicit, exclusionary, tailored rebate contracts illegal. It only objected to total exclusion of competitors, and told Coke to allow 20% non-Coke. If AMD can live with 20% share, they are home free. maybe that's why Henri left. He was insisting on 30% or bust.

To: fastpathguru who wrote (241959)	10/6/2007 2:49:13 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

FPG, > They are making multiple, contradicting* arguments including that one.* Fixed. > Intel is not accused of "offering volume discounts." They are accused of price discrimination and predatory pricing disguised as volume rebates. To AMD, anything that hurts them is "predatory" and "price discrimination." Their complaint about Intel's optimized compiler is a perfect example. OMG, Intel optimizes their compilers for Intel CPUs! That damn monopoly! (No need to repeat AMD's claim that the compiler "de-optimizes" for AMD processors.) Anyway, we've come a long way from the notion that Intel's market power adds $14.89 to each PC. Now we're discussing how Intel structured its rebates. Which, of course, are good for the consumer ... :-P Tenchusatsu