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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gbh who wrote (46169)	2/8/1999 10:47:00 PM
From: Ed Beers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

> INTC will continue to eat AMDs lunch. Celeron does perform on par with equal speed PII, but it hasn't slowed PII sales yet. < This is the result of brilliant marketing strategy. First you release a Celeron with no cache and no performance. Then having clearly demonstrated that the Celerons are inferior, you add cache and wait for the value buyers to discover them. In fact, it is difficult to quantify differences between the small but fast cache in the Celeron and the large but slow cache in the Pentium II.

To: gbh who wrote (46169)	2/8/1999 11:42:00 PM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Gary: I guess I'd better ask whether your comments are a spoof, or whether they are the actual view you hold. I didn't see some (g)s so I take it the comments reflect the point of view held. Differing views make a market. Airing the supporting reasons benefits all. Gary, I'll give you awfully big odds on a bet that CPQ didn't learn a lesson last year. Like last year, it is already well known and well discussed in the channel. Receivables up big sequentially also support this view. Who ate whose lunch?. Zero to 20% plus of the micro market share in a year says it all for me. I do think INTC has a better chance of surviving the price war, but its stock price does not reflect the damage already inflicted nor the damage to come. I would appreciate your views as to how INTC is eating AMD's lunch. Why pay big bucks for the high priced P2 when the low priced Celerons perform very similarly? Or turning it around, why is INTC selling high end performance in low end packaging? Cannibalizing rarely ends well. I.T. guys and gals I talk to want the cheap machines. Their budgets are being cut back anyway. High end workstations are a small fraction of the corporate PC market. It is also extremely competitive. The memory producers seem to agree with my point of view about Rambus. Their attitude is that they simply don't see enough sales of high end products (that would benefit from Rambus), to make it worthwhile to gear up for it. That is what has caused Intel to write the incentive cheques. Dell has talked it up in previous Christmas periods, and hasn't this year. I outlined other worries in previous posts. Past flops were not previewed to my knowledge. Not in bottom end, and direct competition mounting. We'll know shortly. I missed the last point and wasn't sure which way you might have meant it with respect to the PC "melt". IDC, CompUSA, all the big resellers, in fact virtually all results and warnings point to it. Best, Earlie .