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: JCB01 who wrote (260276)	5/15/2009 6:56:54 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

JCB, > Of course. Any change in orders/strategy has to make sense to the OEM in terms of the bottom line. Loss of a rebate, loss of allocation, etc. are all going to affect said bottom line. Couldn't have said it better myself. Now which losses mentioned above would be the result of normal business dealings, and which ones would be the result of Intel supposedly "abusing" its "monopoly" position? According to the AMD supporters on this thread, along with the summary of the EU decision, most of it is due to the latter. How do we know? Because Neelie the Terrible said so. Here's a mental exercise to challenge that line of reasoning. What would have changed had Intel given the same rebate schedule to all OEMs, including the one who was offered one million free AMD CPUs? Or no volume rebates at all? Would the OEM then have been obligated to accept all one million of AMD's free CPUs? (Assume AMD would still feel the need to give them away like that.) If the answer is no, then that would suggest that the EU's line of reasoning is faulty. Tenchusatsu