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: gvatty who wrote (242062)	10/8/2007 2:44:16 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

Gvatty, > But I believe 100 billion or so so in additional research and development, more fabs, and marketing would have made AMD more successful and given consumers much better chips than Intel is currently providing. That's a real crock. Where do you think the $100B comes from in the first place? From Uncle Scrooge? Over the entire lifetime of the two companies, Intel has proven that it does business better than AMD. That's why Intel has tens of billions of dollars in revenue and can afford to spend a significant chunk of it on R&D, fab development, etc. If AMD had the $100B or so, you can bet that the first thing AMD would do is pay for more executive perks such as limos and private jets. Maybe that's one reason why AMD is far behind Intel. You can argue now that Intel should not be able to use its past success to unfairly lock competitors out of the market. But according to AMD, pretty much anything Intel does, short of giving away the market (Prescott anyone?), is "unfair." Tenchusatsu