To: pgerassi who wrote (247876 ) 2/15/2008 9:04:06 PM From: wbmw Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872 Re: To control segmentation, you must control supply to each segment and make each CPU greatly tied to its intended segment. So you are saying that in mature existing markets, Intel will force maximal prices. If you are controlling supply to a market segment, you are controlling supply, period! Not true, Pete. The supply is always growing, because the market is always growing. There's another billion people of opportunity in the world, and they require very low cost computers. That in itself is a segment with rather huge revenue and profit margin opportunity, if the costs are low enough. It's why Intel designed Silverthorne. They are building out FOUR 45nm fabs to service this market, and it doesn't pay to limit supply and maximize prices when this segment cannot afford anything less. Re: You can't have controlled supplies in an elastic market. It defeats the purpose of maximizing revenue. Great that you see things my way. Re: You think that new users won't notice what Intel does to existing mature markets? They would be alienated by that and go to CPUs where many competitors exist, like ARM or MIPS. Why stick your head in a noose? What are you talking about here? This is not what I said. Re: There is no incentive for a monopoly to do this. If Nehalems are 2X as fast, then they will be priced accordingly, 2 times what Extreme Editions are. Pricing of the higher bins is never linear with performance. If it were, then Extreme Edition parts would be retailing for $345, a 30% increase over the price of a Q6600. However, making the Extreme Edition performance delta greater at the same price point would encourage more people to buy one, rather than aiming for the 2nd or 3rd bin down.