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: Scumbria who wrote (48534)	2/4/1999 6:45:00 PM
From: Ritz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572159

Scumbria: Re: "They are displaying the type of monopolistic behavior that anti-trust laws were specifically written for." ROFL nothing ever ever changes.....try this old old link, you might find it useful.... techstocks.com Oh yeah..."Please support the PC industry & protect consumer interest"...LOL -Ritz

To: Scumbria who wrote (48534)	2/4/1999 6:59:00 PM
From: RDM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572159

I do not think that Intel expected that AMD would be without the "benefit" of the engineering fixes until the back half of the quarter. I believe that they were possibly even scared that AMD would have plenty of 400Mhz parts. This is why the accelerated their schedule for Celerons. It is an interesting question what Intels costs are. I am sure that there is considerable knowledge on this thread about the factors contributing to cost of sales. However, the apportionment of marketing, G&A, R&D charges of $5.1B by Intel recovered at least in part by the shipping of 100,000 X86 CPUS per year (possibly $40-$51 per chip). This makes it possible for anti-trust lawyers to argue that if the cost of sales is $50 for a celeron then charging less than $90 is dumping. What percentage of Celeron sales is less than $90? I do not know. Anyone with any ideas while we are waiting for next quarter?