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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Engel who wrote (56679)	6/2/1998 4:12:00 PM
From: Burt Masnick	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, Here's my guess near term & long term Near term 1) Preannouncement guiding earnings down $.05 Near term 2) I am guessing that $65 will be effectively the "bottom" Near term 3) Sales picking up strongly beginning this summer (except in Asia). Long term 1) Merced late still a big success. Long term 2) Mendocino & Katmai light up their sales segments Long term 3) The final emergence of the killer apps. I am guessing that AMD has continuing yield/bin problems. Outside of a few thread chearleaders, it's far too quiet from official AMD. If there was good news, you'd see full page ads and a steady stream of press releases in the Wall Street Journal. Restrained is not their style. Can't understand AMD stock tanking like that unless there's serious bad news lurking (obviously somebody knew some bad news about Intel and it affected the price negatively). Milli Vanilli pretending to be The Beatles only works for a short time. I don't think "AMD when you want to play games" is a winning slogan. NSM/Cyrix would find a way to come in fourth in a three horse race. Merced is probably a managerial setback exactly as you indicated. I have considerable experience with technical project management. The scenario of all the components not being in place in a timely manner sounds very likely. I suspect that the true slip was 3 months and management said lets make it 6 months so that even with further slippage, the new release date absolutely holds. Large multithread projects are bloody nightmares to manage. Usually a previously non-critical path item becomes the roadblock due to ripples caused by rescheduling efforts. A path or paths previously getting nominal staffing and resources suddenly is revealed as the new critical path(s) to the whole schedule and suddenly gets beefed up support, which slows the path down initially as the ramped-up tasks struggle to come up to speed (see The Mythical Man-Month by Brooks for IBM's horror story on OS 360). As a paranthetical note, OS360 was an enormous success eventually, despite a seriously troubled development.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (56679)	6/2/1998 4:21:00 PM
From: Steve Porter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, It is clearly a mistake and a setback. However, I wouldn't characterize a 6 month schedule slip on a processor that may be one of the most innovative and complex in the world as a "blunder". Well I won't argue with you over the finer points of the English language. Lord knows I butcher it often enough with careless typing ;-). However, given the mentality at Intel, do you not consider it very "strange" (for lack of a better word) that Intel would miss something like that. Could it be competitve presures getting to them, could it be having to collaborate with HP (which as far as I know Intel has never done before, with anyone), or a combination of both, or did someone just "F*ck up"? Steve