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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (260176)	5/14/2009 12:54:37 PM
From: gvatty	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

The article is very short sighted. The consumer may be benefited by Intel's practices in the short term.(Because of price). If AMD goes out of business and Intel has a virtual monopoly Intel's pricing policies would change and harm the consumer. Also, Intel's policies squeeze AMD by eliminating or reducing their profit. Thus AMD does not have sufficient capital for research and development to develop new chip designs. This also does not benefit the consumer. Price is not the only component for harm to the consumer. P.S. The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp. aka Rupert Murdoch. One could argue it has become the print version of Fox News.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (260176)	5/14/2009 1:08:49 PM
From: fastpathguru	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Seems like the WSJ agrees with me, though you guys will probably claim that they're in the pockets of Intel: Remember what I told you I'd show you, if you showed me a complaining "economist"? That article was nuttier even than anything I've read here, and is so chock full of errors and partisan rhetoric that to rebut it is to give it more credit than it deserves. Update: I notice that no one wants to claim credit for writing said piece of trash... fpg

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (260176)	5/14/2009 2:45:24 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"Anything Intel does to gain market share will hurt AMD in a de facto manner." Moving the goal posts. There are legal and illegal ways to gain market share. Tailoring a discount schedule so as to force exclusive use isn't one of the legal ways. Which is precisely what the EC has determined happened. "That includes making any volume discounts, apparently." Are you intentionally distorting the ruling? Or, did you just didn't understand it? Because that isn't apparent at all. I have to ask, though. Why do you think that the EC would unfairly favor AMD? Because that is what is needed to fuel your little fantasy...