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: Petz who wrote (48604)	2/4/1999 11:31:00 PM
From: Ritz	Respond to of 1572207

Petz: Re: It will be AMD, NSM and Centaur's job to prove that the high end market is a SEPARATE MARKET from the low-end market. If the government accepts these as independent markets, Intel is DUCK SOUP." Good point. Maybe not duck soup, but it would strengthen their case immeasurably. -Ritz

To: Petz who wrote (48604)	2/4/1999 11:57:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572207

Re: "Elmer, on monopolies, no one claims Intel has a current monopoly on consumer PC chips. It DOES have a monopoly on high-end microprocessor chips, even counting all the Alpha, SPARC and high speed G3 chips. It will be AMD, NSM and Centaur's job to prove that the high end market is a SEPARATE MARKET from the low-end market. If the government accepts these as independent markets, Intel is DUCK SOUP." The credit for that post should go to Longshot. I was only complimenting him on his well thoughtout post. As for claims of an Intel monopoly, I believe the FTC is making just such a claim. Keep in mind, being a monolopy is not illegal and it is the FTC's job to prove that: #1 Intel is a monopoly (and you seem to be on the side that says that it is not, at least on the low end) and #2 that Intel used that monopoly position to illegally pressure some of it's customers into granting Intel licenses under threat of supply cutoff. On the high end Intel is not a monopoly IMHO, and this thread has spent a lot of time with the AMD proponents proudly proclaiming just that fact. We have been told that AMD is very competitive with the K6-3 (never mind that it never seems to ship) and that the K7 will blow away anything Intel will have for years to come (never mind that the K7 isn't available, no benchmarks have ever been published and no one seems to be willing to come forward and admit they plan to use it). You guys are in a really odd position. You are now faced with arguing against the very position you(generically) so vehemently proclaimed. That Intel is no longer in the dominant position. AMD is a viable challenger. AMD has the products, AMD has the customers and Intel no longer commands the market. To shield yourselves from the truth that AMD is incompetent, you must dust off your old arguments that you thought you had buried forever and once again point your finger at Intel, rather than accept the obvious truth. AMD management made just too many ultra high risk decisions and eventually the coin flip came up tails. EP