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: wbmw who wrote (259653)	4/9/2009 11:12:27 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Respond to of 275872

wbmw - Regarding the FTC. By their own statements they've been investigating Intel for years on an informal basis. It was informal because Intel always provided then with whatever they asked for so there was no reason to elevate it. It became formal only because of AMD's whining (not their words but that's essentially it). Now, the situation in the EU could be different, but I'm really not too concerned about any judgment that this group of ideologues imposes. When Intel has their chance in a real court, and with the actual laws being interpreted as opposed to opinion and conjecture, I think people will see a much fairer trial. Same with the KFTC. When witnesses are on the stand under oath and can be cross examined I think things will be different.

To: wbmw who wrote (259653)	4/10/2009 12:37:47 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Beamer, > They are too diligent to make the kinds of mistakes that AMD is claiming Diligent or not, all AMD needs is a sympathetic judge and a few "experts" that will testify under oath that the Intel monopoly is adding $100 to the cost of every PC. Don't forget Neal Nelson, "The Benchmark Bulldog," who will probably testify under oath that AMD's products are superior to Intel's in every single way: Message 25505250 This has become a political fight thanks to AMD. Tenchusatsu