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 (259477)	4/6/2009 12:13:11 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

fpg - You're the one who is lacking in reasoning skills and convincing yourself is hardly a win when you were convinced before this discussion began. Me: Clearly protecting competition is intended as a means of protecting the consumer. You: Clearly? This is exactly what I've been saying all along, and you have been arguing with me every step of the way! No this is exactly the opposite of what you have been arguing. Think it through: If the court agrees that protecting the consumer is the ultimate intent then it seems to me your argument falls apart because AMD will have to show how the consumer has been harmed by lower prices and higher performance/features. Protecting competition at the expense of the consumer, rather than protecting the consumer himself, is AMD's only hope here because they can not show any consumer harm nor can they show Intel sold below cost. Hypotheticals don't count. Produce a contract. That's why it makes a difference if the law ultimately protects the consumer or competition. You've argued it protects competition, I've argued it protects the consumer. Neither of us are trained in the law, just opining.

To: fastpathguru who wrote (259477)	4/6/2009 1:19:52 PM
From: Mahmoud Mohammed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mr Guru, Re: "WTF is wrong with you? ... Why is it so difficult for you to concede that I am right?" Because you are wrong. You are trying very hard to use the anti-trust laws to protect the competitor (AMD) from their own (AMD's) incompetence. Please answer the question that Elmer poses ... How has the consumer been injured? Right now, Hewlett-Packard (as an example) sells laptops and desktops with both AMD and INTC CPU's. Very close to identical HP models have the AMD processor version selling cheaper by $50-$100. HP is making money on all of these products (AMD or INTC processors) The AMD models should be selling like "hotcakes". Obviously, AMD is dumping their products below costs. Now, let me put it in a language you should understand ... "Answer the F'ing question or STFU and GTFO". And for Dear Pete ... "Tonight, you'll be sleep'in with the fishes". <ggg> Mahmoud