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: Jim McMannis who wrote (52239)	3/10/1999 12:32:00 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577020

Re: "Also has to do with Intel setting the pace and AMD always scrambling to catch up. Intel has time to tweak designs and AMD always has to take too many chances. At best, the K6-III is a stop gap to get to the K7. I've said that before. I've also said that major things have to come together for the K7 to be reality while all Intel has to do is tweak old designs. So I ask you, who is more likely to make big mistakes? You know the answer." Yes we all know the answer. Which brings us to the heart of the matter. I agree with your analysis. Given that, were the decision makers acting in the best interests of the shareholders? The decision to "bet the farm" on the K6 and now the K7 was made at the expense of the other divisions. Was this a sound business decision? Might not the shareholders have been better served by pouring those resources into the other product lines? Who was being served by taking on Intel? Might that decision have been overly influenced by personal reasons? These are the same people who are deciding AMD's future today. Do you trust them to act on behalf of the shareholders? EP