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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Engel who wrote (29036)	2/27/1998 10:44:00 AM
From: Kevin K. Spurway	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573927

Paul, I'm afraid I have to agree with your logic here. This deal doesn't make any sense to me, other than a desperate measure to keep AMD going until Dresden is up and running. That means AMD has essentially given up on Fab 25. We'll know more when some of the details of the deal emerge. But unless either the financials of the deal are good for AMD (unlikely, IMHO, given the Cyrix deal as precedent) or IBM is giving up some technology (copper), or putting K6 on their best process (unlikely), I just can't see how this makes sense (or cents) for AMD. Kevin

To: Paul Engel who wrote (29036)	2/27/1998 11:21:00 AM
From: Profits	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573927

Paul, AMD has Fab 25 and Sub Micron Development Center. Fab 30 is expected on-line in 1999. Now would it stand to reason that AMD (currently with 1 and half fabs on-line, might find it necessary to add IBM as a foundry. Given the fact that Intel has 6 megafabs I would think that adding IBM as a foundry wouldn't be a surprise to you. Doesn't this make sense? Intel produces 20 million CPUs per quarter, AMD historically has produced one tenth of that. Gee, let me see, hey IBM has a big fab and they're partnering with AMD. Sounds like a good fit. Profits