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: Patrick Grinsell who wrote (68013)	11/6/1998 7:29:00 PM
From: Badger	Respond to of 186894

PMFJI, but I'll give it a go... 1) INTC's departure from the X86 architecture may be their undoing. It resembles Microsoft's initial version of NT which failed miserably due to incompatibilities. Without a bridge, early adoption will be tough going. True enough, early adoption is perhaps tough. For this Intel has to rely on user confidence in the brand - dependability is important above all in business, more so than speed. This is why, IMO, a business vendor will choose a Intel chip over an AMD chip with an equivalent speed, even if the latter is less expensive. AMD has to clear this hurdle before they can become a serious threat to Intel on the desktop and even think about attacking the server segment. 2) The need for high-end processors is declining. Hardware capacity is outstripping software demands. I point to the large growing market of low-end PC's of which Intel is losing a significant piece of the market share. Not. I have never heard of anyone not buying the fastest CPU they could afford, whatever the brand. The same reasoning works for hard drives - get as much as you can afford, because even if you don't need it now you will soon. You're right that office applications don't demand a screaming machine, but that's not what I use my home machine for anyway. I play games. And games eat up huge chunks of CPU cycles and are ALWAYS on the edge of the performance envelope. That the demand for high-end processors in the server market is going up is self-evident, I think. But feel free to convince me that I'm wrong. 3) Experts seem to think that if K7 is released on schedule (that would be a new one for AMD wouldn't it?) that the technology will be 18 months ahead of Intel. Also, AMD has a license for KNI but I don't believe INTC has a license for 3dNOW. This is a legitimate argument, or will be if the 'if' can be removed from the sentence. But even 'if' the K7 is released on schedule it remains to be seen what Intel's response will be, what consumers think, and how well it works. So many intangibles that I'm not sure this is a good enough reason to go short on INTC. That AMD has licensed KNI from Intel, but Intel hasn't reciprocated by licensing 3DNOW!, is not bullish for AMD, I think. It looks like Intel is behind KNI come Hell or high water while AMD feels the need to hedge its bet and have a KNI solution available if 3DNOW! starts losing badly. If there were a massive surge of support for 3DNOW! from the marketplace, if Intel had licensed 3DNOW - these would be bullish for AMD. They haven't happened yet. 4) Where does INTC go from here? How do they increase their already incredible market share? Each step up is a hard climb, but they have a long way to fall. By elbowing into the very-high-end server markets, first with Xeon (which is selling like crazy BTW), then via Merced. Margins are exceptional up there. Intel is also quite diversified with holdings in networking (consider the recent acquisitions of Dayna and Shiva), DRAM (recent $500 million investment in Micron), and my own little corner of the universe, management software. I'm sure I'm missing some areas, but you get the idea. My opinion is that shorting Intel is a risky gambit in any time frame, but Lord Knows the market has been all over the place in the last year or so, and not always rationally. And this is high tech, after all, where things could turn on a dime. If you can time the market there's always money to be made going short - I just consider it very risky, especially with an established giant like INTC. Regardless, best of luck on your investments. Badger

To: Patrick Grinsell who wrote (68013)	11/6/1998 7:35:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "1) INTC's departure from the X86 architecture may be their undoing. It resembles Microsoft's initial version of NT which failed miserably due to incompatibilities. Without a bridge, early adoption will be tough going." Intel is continuing to develop new x86 generations. Yes Merced will be new and different but there are other x86 development projects at work inside Intel. Re: "AMD has a license for KNI but I don't believe INTC has a license for 3dNOW." I believe you are wrong about AMD having a KNI license. Where did you hear that? EP

To: Patrick Grinsell who wrote (68013)	11/6/1998 8:16:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE: Shorting Intel If Intel will peak in June 99, that would be the best time to short it. You will avoid many unpleasant palpitations and markings of your short to market while it climbs to 110 or 120 over the next six months. Of course, the situation may have changed by then, and the reasons for shorting it will have proved to be valid or, more likely, invalid. Of course you could buy Jan 2000 or 2001 puts, and watch time decay, but unless you are acting under irresistible impulse, let it wait.

To: Patrick Grinsell who wrote (68013)	11/7/1998 3:14:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 186894

<3) Experts seem to think that if K7 is released on schedule (that would be a new one for AMD wouldn't it?) that the technology will be 18 months ahead of Intel.> This comes from the notion that the K7 is going to be the equivalent of Intel's P7 (Willamette and Foster). From the foils presented by AMD, I consider K7 to be more like a P6 with a couple of extra cylinders than a P7. It's not that AMD is 18 months ahead of Intel, it's just that AMD is taking advantage of a window of opportunity opened up by Intel's five-year span between the P6 (Pentium II) and P7 (Willamette). Tenchusatsu