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: Elmer Phud who wrote (261954)	10/15/2009 1:24:09 AM
From: fastpathguru	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

You're fantasizing. Nothing you quote shows that Intel required 100% exclusivity, only that it achieved it. How exactly, then, did they achieve it? Given that Lenovo (according to their statements to the EC) thought Intel's products were uncompetitive and had supply issues, and AMD's products were kicking Intels' ass and in demand by customers, and given that Lenovo had already made investments in developing an AMD notebook product and had signed deals with AMD and actually began producing product, and given that the MCP was offered, accepted, and delivered, and subsequently Lenovo backed out of the deals they had negotiated with AMD and dropped them as a supplier, and given that multiple other email, etc. evidence states directly that the Intel deal prevents them from developing the AMD notebooks, what reasonale explanation could you possibly give that explains how Intel achieved 100% share at Lenovo, if not for the millions of dollars that are directly related to a de-facto exclusive arrangement by many contemporaneous emails? The rest of your rant is circumstantial and by no means unambiguous. It proves nothing other than your desperate need to believe. Again, why not question the people involved instead of hanging your hopes on ambiguous emails? The answer is obvious. You can't take the risk of asking people to clear up their statements. It will destroy your house of cards. LOL, I knew you wouldn't have read the EC's decision, even by now. Wouldn't want to taint that pure blue brain of yours. I note that you didn't use the word "hearsay" to describe it. My so-called "rant" is just a tiny slice of the evidence the EC bases their Lenovo analysis on... There's 20x more in the decision that would fill these gaps for you if you could just bring yourself to actually learn anything about what you're arguing about. There are literally dozens and dozens of emails, from both Lenovo and Intel, that corroborate each other and paint a complete picture of what was going on at the time, and your response is, effectively, "nuh uh!" + <stuff head in sand> BTW, your lack of response to my handing you your ass re: your cow/goat/duck obsession has been noted... It too is just a single thread in a tapestry of evidence that shows you are an Intel sycophant who has no credibility, honesty, or sincerity. fpg