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: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (57679)	5/9/1999 12:57:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Respond to of 1573682

Tad - < My own contention is that INTC's success in migrating up the food chain has offered substantial protection to the profit stream even as revenue growth has proved more erratic over the past several quarters. > I believe this demonstrates Intel's ability to be an industry leader. My analysis would be more positive toward INTC's ability to migrate up the food chain so effectively. Analysts that tend to be more negative on INTC tend to come across as if INTC's success in the server / workstation business is somehow evidence of "not playing fair". Intel has, with it's customers, developed products in this space that have very attractive price-performance characteristics and serve a major market segment. Regarding profits from this segment somehow insulating Intel from perceived softness in the PC sector. I believe Otellini in answering a question from one of the analysts indicated that [Otelini] views the three different MPU product lines as three distinct businesses. I would assume that three distinct different business probably have different cost structure, margins, customers, etc. It would be nice if the analysts got a little more "analytical" and addressed these segments more singularly, IMHO. Since I've got you here, what do you think about Intel's obvious efforts to diversify? For example, Mark Christensen, NPG VP, is targeting 30% year over year growth in this business. Do the diversification efforts have any bearing of your analysis of INTC as an investment? PB

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (57679)	5/9/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573682

Tad - Re: "If AMD is able to introduce a credible entrant into the high end, .." WHy is it that you, AND EVERY OTHER AMD Hopeful, preface the future success of this company with the phrase IF AMD ? You give yourself an automatic ESCAPE HATCH by qualifying any possible future AMD success with the big IF AMD this or IF AMD that. I notice you never say WHEN AMD will accomplish this or that, always IF AMD ...... Paul

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (57679)	5/9/1999 1:22:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573682

TAD - Re: ". If AMD is able to introduce a credible entrant into the high end, that protection is likely to prove less robust and both revenues and profits are likely to grow at rates that would be disappointing to most investors." You seem to have co-opted AMD's management raison d'etre : " We are here to destroy Intel - NOT TO HELP OUR SHAREHOLDERS or our EMPLOYEES ONE DAMN BIT." Paul

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (57679)	5/9/1999 1:50:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573682

Tad - Minor but significant correction to my previous post I incorrectly used the abbreviation "NPG" when referencing Intel's Networking business. This stood for "Network Products Group". Recently, Intel changed the name of the division to "Network and Communications Group" [NCG]. I take it this change represents an expanded focus of intended activity. PB

To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (57679)	5/9/1999 5:27:00 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 1573682

re: "I'd love to discuss this at length, but I'm being summoned to help my wife do the only thing more difficult than analyze technology investments: bathe a one-year-old German shepherd back from a walk through wet springtime woods." I once owned, or should I more correctly say, was owned by a German Shepherd that displayed a higher level of intelligence than many who contribute to this thread. This is in no way a put down, the dog was incredibly intelligent. It understood English sentences and performed complex tasks without prior specific training. Once a friend of mine and I were clowning around and one of us said "Rex is young and innocent and shouldn't see this" with that, Rex dropped to the ground from his standing position and covered his eyes with his paws. We were both totally silent for at least a solid minute after that. I had and have owned a number of dogs before and since, none that were or have been like Rex. We currently have a "unique" Poodle. I say that it is unique because it is the only Poodle that I have ever heard of that is actually stupid. Rascal has an extremely good personality that makes up for his intellectual shortcomings. I guess that there is a "BELL CURVE" for dogs as well as for humans. By the way, Rex hated baths; but, would, with verbal encouragement, voluntarily enter and submit to the indignity of a bath. Regards, DARBES