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: Kashish King who wrote (31427)	4/8/1998 5:52:00 AM
From: Kevin K. Spurway	Respond to of 1571885

Re: "soft demand and an existing inventory glut" Say what you will about K6 production problems, but demand for the chip has NOT been weak. It was pretty clear from the conference call that many customers of AMD couldn't get all the chips they required during Q1. I'm not interested in what justifies the bears' comments. I can figure out how one might be bearish on AMD on my own. What I'm curious about is what prompts virulent AMD bears to resort to outright fabrication in order to make their case. And as I said, it's one of two things: they're short AMD, or they're long Intel and think the threat from AMD is for real. Kevin

To: Kashish King who wrote (31427)	4/8/1998 7:50:00 AM
From: Andreas Helke	Respond to of 1571885

You got things mixed up. AMD had high demand for CPU chips but could not deliver those due to production problems. The demand for the many other product lines that AMD could have produced in high numbers like flash memory and logic chips for networking equipment was weak. Andreas

To: Kashish King who wrote (31427)	4/8/1998 1:13:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571885

Rod, your "AMD bearism" is really funny. 1. First your buddies argued that AMD could never make K6-233MHz. 2. When the K6-233 appeared in stores they claimed them "volt-jacked" because of poor process technology (forgetting of course that this is quite typical for industry: Intel 486-33 vere 3.3V but 486-50 and 486-66 were 5V). 3. Then they said AMD can never get 266MHz. When K6-266 appeared in IBM Aptivas "AMD bears" pronounced them as non-issue and just an experimental production. 4. Then "bears" complained that due to low production AND HIGH DEMAND, some AMD customers were cut off - CyberMax (or whatever). 5. When K6-266 started to flood distribution channels (>20 mail distributors as per today) you said that all this yield resolution issue is just a rumor, "Phantoms" or remarked Pentiums (my own Furst April joke), and "bears" need some official confirmation. 6. When the confirmation came, you are complaining that "news of the so-called fixed yield problems came out of Jerry Sanders mouth." Now you are saying that the K6-266 availability is due to WEAK DEMAND. Remember #4 ? Funny, is not it? Today you failed to comprehend that K6-266 and K6-300 are not "outdated .35 micron process" parts but already * 0.25 um, * low voltage and mobile ready, * 100MHz-bus ALi, SiS and VIA supported, * routinely overclockable to 375MHz * (and most likely will be officially produced at 350 and 400MHz speed grades).