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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (81604)	5/26/1999 1:06:00 AM
From: Gary Ng	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Scumbria, Re: I don't see how I was wrong. You should look at the financial result. >Intel has maintained decent ASP's because of the huge >price tag on Xeon What is your estimate for both volume and revenue for Xeon (I have been asking this every time I saw this argument but never get an answer). Gary

To: Scumbria who wrote (81604)	5/26/1999 1:27:00 AM
From: dumbmoney	Respond to of 186894

Intel has maintained decent ASP's because of the huge price tag on Xeon. Take Xeon away, and Intel's CPU margins are not looking too good by traditional standards. What are you saying, that Xeon is NOT a part of Intel's market segmentation strategy? How many Xeon machines does Fry's sell?

To: Scumbria who wrote (81604)	5/26/1999 3:01:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Respond to of 186894

Scumbria - <I was at Fry's on Sunday and there was only one PII system on display.> I would hope so. Intel has virtually stopped producing them. <April retail sales numbers show K6-II #1, Celeron #2, and PII/PIII a distant #3> Why don't you give the world wide market share when you're making your arguments, instead of continually harping about a 10% segment? <Intel has maintained decent ASP's because of the huge price tag on Xeon. Take Xeon away, and Intel's CPU margins are not looking too good by traditional standards.> What in the heck do traditional standards have to do with anything. Business environments are often dynamic. Wishing them to be static is a fantasy. Take K7 away, and AMD is deader than a doornail. Xeon is reality. Wishing it out of existence will do nothing. AMD will have to compete. A sullied endeavor, I know, but that's what makes the system work, so to speak. <I don't see how I was wrong.> I will grant you that you may believe you see a trend. I don't believe you can say you are right or wrong yet. Besides, K6 has never made money. That make it wrong. According to you it has hurt Intel's stock price, which I sense is more important to you than the plight of that poor 85 year old man at the AMD shareholder's meeting. PB

To: Scumbria who wrote (81604)	5/26/1999 1:30:00 PM
From: John Hull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

S-re:"April retail sales numbers show K6-II #1, Celeron #2, and PII/PIII a distant #3. Intel has maintained decent ASP's because of the huge price tag on Xeon. Take Xeon away, and Intel's CPU margins are not looking too good by traditional standards. I don't see how I was wrong." You are wrong. Intel told you two years ago that we saw long term margins at 50% + or - a few points. Well they're at 59%. If you understood the market segmentation and lived outside U.S. Retail data for a minute or two, you would understand that with or without Xeon, Intel is doing a pretty impressive job of managing its business. Believe me, even without Xeon, Intel's CPU margins are doing quite nicely by "traditional standards". regards, jh