Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
drjohn,
re:Dell->AMD Why do you suppose the roll out is slow, lack of chips/motherboards, lack of demand or all of the above.
Assuming the Wall St analyst is correct, that is a very good question. I do not have access to his report, perhaps he gives more "color" on the reasons. My guess is all of the above. I would also add the posibility that Dell maybe having second thoughts about going AMD (laptop and desktop) especially if initial Dell sustomer enthusiasm has been luke warm. Often, people will voice their opinion in generalities, i.e. "Dell should sell AMD systems", but waffle when confronted with making a decision themselves, i.e. "I would not buy one".
IMHO
"Dell Inc. (DELL) fell 46 cents, or 2%, to $22.57 following a rating downgrade from analyst Shaw Wu of American Technology Research. Wu cut his ratin on Dell to neutral from buy for several reasons, including a slow rollout of new systems that run on microprocessors from Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) ."
Sorry do not have a link.
IMHO
drjohn,
More stock option repricing hanky-panky. I hope Intel had the smarts not to partake in the practise, now as for AMD has anyone even bothered to check.
AMD has repriced options. Just google "AMD stock option repricing". Just skimming through a few of these links, it seems that AMD repriced options in 1996 and 1998. The following from 1998-9 says "Company approved a stock option repricing program pursuant..."
http://sec.edgar-online.com/1998/11/12/08/0001012870-98-002829/Section6.asp
More recently, at the 2006 spring stockholders meeting, there was an amendment to a 2004 program that essentially "halted" the practice of repricing.
In conclusion, it seems that AMD has repriced options. The important question however, is as you state, was it done properly or was there any "hanky-panky" involved. Don't know.
IMHO
rlweitz,
What is Gateway's x86 server marketshare?
Strong and Growing
Following its merger with eMachines, Gateway is now the third-largest provider of PCs in the U.S., and is one of the fastest-growing server vendors, with a No. 5 ranking in U.S. server shipments (according to an IDC report dated February 28, 2005).
http://www.gateway.com/work/about/why_gateway.asp?seg=cp
I'll bet it's mid to low single digits.
Yep, probably similar to AMD's share at about the Opteron intro. You make a good point.
IMHO
Hey it's all good ! Intel will continue to have a glaring spotlight on it for years to come so smile for the camera little me
That's the spirit mas. The reason I like making you smile in your posts, now and then, is that I know you do not own AMD stock and so when AMD stock goes to the trash bin, I won't feel bad about a fellow poster taking a financial hit ;)
IMHO
mas,
these genuine quad-cores will come in the same power slots ...
Yes they will.
IMHO
mas,
AMD are appealling this [judge dismisal of portion of lawsuit]
Really? That would be great news. Losing the appeal would remind Wall Street once again how AMD's desperate attempt at getting outside assistance for its poor competitive perormance has been given another blow. By that time the ATI deal and any arbitrage activity will not exist and AMD's stock should do a lot worse. Not to mention that the appeal may push the trial date beyond April 2009. Of course, AMD could win ;) That would mean AMD will have to wait longer to collect........
"99 million dollars"
IMHO
mas, Too late ;)
Gateway picks Woodcrest for new servers.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13656556
AMD shows off quad core 65 nanometre wafers
IMHO
Thanks to Tecate for the link.
plyngso,
The mere filing of the lawsuit did provide rather immediate dividends in terms of Intel changing its behavior.
I am not sure about this. I am actually more in agreement with jjayxxxx post,
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13651196
Intel laid out the rules and OEM's played along (it helps when you have a technology lead like they had at one time). The rules are still the same, so Intel has made no significant changes. However, the OEM's have decided not to play along under those rules anymore. That happens when you lose the technology lead. It also helps to have the AMD lawsuit as an extra insentive. Some of these OEM's are envisioning questions from a judge, so their recent action will help them justify their past and present behavior.
But AMD has traded that problem for the new problem of being behind on design & process. And with Intel's new 2-year cadence, I doubt that's going to get better anytime soon.
Now your talking. The competitive landscape is the ultimate driving force for the behavior of OEM's, Intel and AMD alike, and, the silver bullet that will drive through the heart of the lawsuit.
IMHO
jhalada,
but do you believe that Intel is innocent of all violations alleged in AMD complaint?
Nice. Outlining Intel's behaviour and characterizing each as a violation of law are two different things. Yes, Intel did behave in certain situations as the lawsuit outlines. No, I do not think they were in violation of the law in those situations. That ofcourse is what the court will decide.
IMHO
jhalada,
Good point about OEMs who now feel less intimidated by Intel under the umbrella of the law suit.
Yes good point. Or put another way, OEMs now feel the intimidation of AMD under the guise of the Intel lawsuit.
Whatever the interpretation, one thing is clear; Intel is not changing its practices because there is nothing wrong with those business pracices to begin with.
IMHO
wbmw,
Lots of info in small amount of time. Hopefully, I captured this correctly, but it is happening faster than I am typing
Appreciate your effort, thanks.
IMHO
wbmw,
think this is great. Intel is finally doing the right thing to educate the market against the competition - The right way
Agree! About time. I also noticed Intel is "naming names". The nice swipe at Scott McSquealy is so great. Recognize your competitors, don't pretend they are not worthy of mention, as in years before. They also demoed against an Opteron? Is this also different from previous Intel IDF's. Does'nt Intel usually compare to its own previous generation systems? All in all a very aggressive Intel is showing its muscle.
IMHO
Intel technicals looking good so far today. Break of 200 simple moving average of 20.06 on strong volume, among the most notable.
Knobias
10:40 a.m. 09/27/2006
Ridgeland, MS, SEP 27, 2006 (EventX/Knobias.com via COMTEX) -- Intel (INTC 20.42) shares are up 2.3% in a breakout above the $20 double top level that bracketed the summer tech slump. So far this week, Intel shares are up 7% well ahead of the 3% advnance in the semiconductor index (SOX) over the same period. Intel is also outperforming its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) which is flat week-to-date. This absolute and relative outperformance is an indication that market sentiment is turning back to Intel from AMD. Bank of America wrote this morning of its preference for Buy-rated Intel (INTC). AG Edwards reiterated its Buy rating on Intel's recent Quad Core production; Jefferies reiterated its Buy rating and upped the INTC price target to $24 from $22.
GET KNOBIAS IN REAL-TIME www.knobias.com
IMHO
For your breakfast pleasure, PDF's of the court decision and judges opinion...
via the "stink-quirer"
http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/stricken2006.pdf
http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/opinionforeign.pdf
IMHO
drjohn,
AMD management good at using other peoples money even thier own shareholders.
Especially their own shareholders money. The dilution of AMD stock from 320 million to about 500 million shares by the end of the year is nothing to sneeze at. AMD stock is the fuel that is driving this company forward and maintaining a high stock price at any cost is paramount because AMD will likely continue to dilute its shares.
IMHO
Gordon H,
the original prediction that Paul made back at the end of July saying something about shipping 1 million chips in 7 weeks. Now we hear they did 5 or 6 million in about 8 weeks
You mean Intel overpromised and underdelivered. Oh wait... This is not AMD, how could they underpromise and overdeliver? Copycats ;)
Thanks for doing the legwork and a very significant datapoint worth considering in making future prognostications.
IMHO
Elmer Phud,
A suit for damages may open up a whole other line of inquiry and it may not be in Intel's best interests to air any more laundry than necessary, dirty or clean.
Yep, that would not be in Intel's interest. On the other hand, I was thinking more of going after AMD for the "defamation" and other haphazard public comments they make with impunity and virtually without any regard to fact. There must be some way to muzzle this company.
BTW, the silence is deafening over on the SI thread.
Another press release about the case:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID=2006-09-27T040615Z_01_N...
IMHO
Elmer Phud,
Intel needs to hold AMD libel for their disgraceful behavior and foulmouth accusations. This should cost them big time.
I think Intel will go after AMD. I believe it is not a question of "if", but "when". Anyway, I agree with you. As a stockholder, I would demand it, unless it "somehow" is not in the best interest of the company.
IMHO
Tenchu, chipgeek
Intel = hip
I love it and I agree. It is hip and refreshingly different, especially from Intel's rather conservative past. Conquering gamers, geeks and hip music followers, what more could you ask for? lol.
IMHO
wbmw,
I think the upcoming quarters will be very positive as consumer perception of tech leadership returns to Intel.
perception
A very good choice of word, beamer. I think it is important for corporations to understand how critical "perception" is in todays connected, global world. According to this quote, looks like it is becoming part of Intel's vocabulary also.
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B0127628C%2DD488%2D4C56%2D80BB%2D42752CE0928...
While Otellini is hopeful the market's opinion is turning more favorable for Intel, he understands the chip giant still has a ways to go.
"Perception doesn't change overnight. It changes in bits and pieces. What you see is Intel rebuilding itself," he said.
Given that AMD has lost/losing the fight on the technical front, you can bet that AMD will battle Intel on the perception and mindshare front. I hope Intel is up for the task.
IMHO
Elmer Phud,
Intel debuts dual-core processors for embedded
it is significant nonetheless. Embedded is becoming a real contributor to Intel's bottom line.
I hope it can contribute and I agree this is significant. Real time embedded systems can really take advantage of the extra core. With even more low power CPU's on the horizon, these should be a slam dunk and excellent sellers. I am also happy to see Intel make positive contributions to the embedded world with the latest CPU technology and not simply wait for todays technology to trickle down. A very proactive move.
IMHO
Borusa,
re: AMD graphics engine on chip,
no external parternerships have been ruled out.
Nor have any external partners being signed up, AFAIK. You may be right on this but I rather we wait and see. Considering AMD paid 5+ billion for ATI, I have a hard time seeing AMD being so benevolent. Remember, AMD likes to use "others peoples money" (successfully, I might add).
IMHO
Vattila,
we seem to disagree on whether or not AMD has become a stronger competitor as a result. I think we agree that it is in absolute terms based on undisputable facts (ie. profitability, OEM wins, gains in new markets, etc.), but, if I understand you correctly, your view is that AMD is now relatively weaker and a riskier prospect going forward from here.
I agree that AMD is in better compeitive position today, based on its momentum with Opteron the past couple of years. But understand that in terms of profitability on a EPS basis, AMD was more profitable than it is today, back in 2000.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/InvestorRelations/0,,51_306_643_10369,00.html
So there is precedent that AMD has failed to keep that type of earnings momentum and has fallen from these hights before. I realize this was during the "dot com" burst, but even so, it is worth noting.
IMHO
Elmer,
Not quite. It's more likely .22 more Intel CPU sold. Intel had about a 78% chance of selling the windows based system that went over to Apple
As a percentage of the total, as Vatilla was saying, I believe you are correct. I was thinking exclusive to the Apple platform.
IMHO
Vattila,
One more Mac sold is one less Windows PC sold, more or less.
One more Mac sold is one more Intel CPU sold and one less AMD CPU sold. To AMD the MAC and Windows market are exclusive. Not to Intel.
Apple would probably be as interested in a second source CPU supplier as any PC vendor, leaving the possibility for AMD design wins
Apple would be interested in AMD, if Intel somehow stumbled in design and manufacturing of its CPU's. As an AMD investor, is this what you are counting on? Keep in mind that Apple has always been a provider of monolithic and closed solutions. The MAC is more a platform than anything else. Platforms evolve. The longer the platform continues with Intel CPU's the less likely of a change. But never say never, right?
IMHO
Vattila,
AMD's quad-core (K8L)...Even if not superior to NGMA it should close the gap.
This is a difference worth noting, because for the last 3 years, it was AMD that had the decisive advantage.
That's the background for my initial thesis --- that a true duopoly (30-70 to 50-50) is now close to inevitable.
Try to imagine what a 50-50 duopoly will do to Intel? Now tell me why, with such momentum, AMD would stop at 50-50? What will that do to Intel? You really think that OEM's who depend so much on Intel for their CPU supplies can "gently" nudge Intel into a 50-50 duopoly?
Finally, what you call a "trend", I call a 3 year Opteron spike and a 6 year Intel hiatus from listening to its customers and losing focus on its "prime directive".
IMHO
Vattila,
OEMs endorsements of AMD as enforcing the view that AMD will continue to be competetive going forward
Maybe I am picking a nit her, but the exact word HP used is they "welcome" AMD products. "Endorsement" is your word. The nuance being that, in the face of a weak Prescott/Netburst solution, AMD's Opteron solution was just what OEM customers wanted. Current and likely future Intel solutions leave little room for AMD to "save the day", if you know what I mean.
IMHO
Vattila,
I'm not sure whether this is a revolt against Intel's platformization strategy
The Dell quote says it all. Read it again:
"The company did not rule out the chance that it might add Intel's bundle to future desktops, but said vPro had to mature first."
Again AMD's approach is to develop an open standard and invite partners (Dell?).
You know a little deeper thought would lead people to conclude that what AMD is really doing is inviting people to spend their money to push AMD's solution so AMD does not have to spend money of their own.
My feeling is that there is a tension in the industry about Intel's platformization strategy. Because it locks out other vendors...
Well you can feel all you want, but the fact is Intel's spends their own money to come up with ideal solutions that benefit the only customer that matters, the end user. OEM's save money. Do not confuse vendors with OEM's. Vendors are not Intel's customer, OEM's are.
Because it locks out other vendors and alternative solutions it is the antithesis to AMD's "Break free" campaign
Can you really say this with a straight face considering AMD has put the memory controller on chip and with the purchase of ATI will put the graphics engine on chip?
IMHO
Vattila,
With AMD's progress and Dell's recent decision to use AMD as a second source, I've got the feeling that something has (finally) changed in this industry.
Well, there definitely is a lot of "flux" right now. But do not underestimate the transition to NGMA that Intel is going through. It has been described by Ottelini as a "reset". This "discontinuity" can give a lot of false readings on the state of the industry and the competitive landscape between AMD and Intel.
It is as if the OEMs got together and decided that they are better served with a CPU duopoly rather than letting Intel continue to rule the roost.
Not out of the question given what the memory makers are accused of having done.
There's now a more or less concious industry goal of keeping AMD at least profitable,
Perhaps true, which is why Intel should focus on the end user customer a lot more, than the OEM customer. No way OEM's will try to keep AMD profitable and in the game, if their customers are asking for Intel C2D's.
Assuming this analysis has any merit it will be very difficult for Intel to revert to the dominant position of the past. A further slide from this position seems inevitable.
Difficult, yes. But I do not think Intel will slide from this position, unless Intel fails to deliver on their NGMA.
Intel's only relief will be a very uncompetetive AMD roadmap or major and prolonged slip-ups from AMD --- none of which has materialized yet.
No MAJOR AMD slip ups yet, that is true and I do not think Intel or its investors should count on that. As for the roadmaps, they can change and thus arguable if one is competitive with the other [Dell and Apple have seen both roadmaps and made different choices, for example]. That leaves only the current competitive status as the strongest indicator. And the current competitive status is that the C2D is decisevely better than AMD's offerings. Now all Intel has to do is turn the competitive advantage into a momentum and mindshare shift and the rest will take care of itself.
IMHO
chipguy,
Holy **** guys, is this one of those star trek alternate
evil universes? Intel has the hot new product while AMD
has bought its way into Dell value box sockets.
Unchecked, perception can become reality.
No, I like Intels chances, and I would not trade it for AMD. I think Intel will be smart enough to handle the situation.
IMHO
chipguy,
Uh hello? Have you been in a coma since before spring IDF.
How many consumers attend IDF? People in the know, know the Core 2 Duo is better. But the consumers are obviously asking for AMD systems, today, since DELL and other OEM's are designing system with AMD CPU's, today. These consumers should be the target. However, I do agree that there is no need to panic (I hope that is not the way my post came across). It takes time and often there is a trickle down affect from the tabloids/experts to the people on the street.
There is no point to screaming
any louder if you're already selling all you can make.
Now as for screaming, I ment the consumer, not Intel. IOW, consumer demand must get to the point where OEM's cannot ignore their desire for Intel CPU's.
IMHO
wbmw,
then I don't buy the optimism on this board that Intel will simply make it up from HP.
I agree. HP as recently as last week stated that they want to see a "duopoly" in the CPU biz. Intel is focusing on the wrong issue if it is simply picking the next "sleeping" partner among Dell v HP v Apple etc. Intel must get back to the basics and convince the general public and consumer of PC's, that the best PC's come with Intel Core 2 CPU's. PERIOD. Only when the AMD systems start gathering dust, will the OEM's put the break on building more AMD systems. Consumers must scream for Intel systems for this to happen.
As for Intel, they better wake up to the reality, that the fight has moved from the manufacturing and design floor to the streets and online forums of the internet. They had better focus on the "consumer" and the "court of public opinion" and "mindshare" issues, because those are the forces driving the OEM's purchasing decision. Intel better start wrestling with the pig, because this pig is tossing mud all over the place and Intel is getting all muddied up anyway. They had better get their own version of Henri Richard, because at least the Intel version will have the advantage that Intel's CPU's are decisively better, so there will be no need to "bend the truth".
[edit: just read one of your posts that seems to agree on some of my points ]
IMHO
wbmw,
Actually there is a fifth, the Dell OptiPlex(TM) 745
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060912/20060912005140.html?.v=1
Intel PR and Investor relations is asleep or completely incompetent. Today Lehman Bros issues a upgrade on AMD emphasizing the "increasing mindshare" that AMD is winning, even in the face of Intel's Core 2 Duo. Sure enough, I noticed a Dow Jones press release which talks about Dell's Tech Day in NYC. There is NO mention of "Intel" or the "Core 2", but mentions AMD here:
"Along with the presentations, Dell rolled out new products, including an energy saving desktop line for corporate customers and a new line of computers for the small business and consumer markets that use Advanced Micro Devices Inc.'s (AMD) dual core 64 bit computing chips."
Note that "energy saving desktop" is the Intel product, but, if anything, is mentioned as if it is an AMD win. This kind of crap happens all the time and Intel investor relations and PR is too incompetent to notice.
Here is the DJ article by Donna Fuscaldo,
http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dynamic/News.php?NewsID=54917&lang=fra&NewsRubrique=2
BTW, an UPDATE to this was soon released to "update to include additional comments from Dell about Advanced Micro Devices". What exactly were her reasons for issuing an UPDATE, specifically to mention AMD again? They could not be trying to pump up AMD stock, in the wake of ATI merger, could they?
IMHO
chipguy,
I wonder if Dell will now announce it will use PowerPC
chips in future products?
Only if wall street analysts ask for it.
IMHO
mas,
exactly what existing AMD quad-core products is it going to osborne ?
So the current mainstream CPU environment, the one in which Intel's core is wiping the floor with AMD's Opteron, will not change for the foreseeable future? OK.
IMHO
mas,
shows K8L in 2007 (Q2)
So that is 3-4 quarters away? Core was introduced 2 quarters ago and you where making a big stink about Intel "osborning" its product line, etc. So why no "osborning" comments about K8L?
IMHO
morrowinder,
Essentially AMD is claiming a 67 watt advantage over Xeon at idle.
At idle? Now what good is it for AMD to claim victory under the conditions that the CPU in question are not doing any work? A raw slab of silicon is not doing any work and consumes less power also, so what? What kind of bragging rights are these? To my limitted understanding, AMD should be the laughing stock of the industry if they hang their hat on this. What am I missing?
IMHO
Speaking of the lawsuit...
EU Regulators Probing Intel Weigh Advanced Micro Gain
Sept. 6 (Bloomberg) -- European Union regulators will ``carefully'' consider whether to proceed with an antitrust investigation of Intel Corp. following recent market share gains by competitor Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=AMD:US&sid=anWyLwfLH...
IMHO
avatar,
The street isn't too pleased. And, it matters what they think. I expected INTC to be up substantially today, not a measly $0.11. AMD was up a hefty $1.56. Hmmmm
The street isn't too pleased. And it matters what they think. I expected INTC to be down substantially today, not a measly $0.69. AMD was down a hefty $1.69. Hmmmmmmmmmm?
IMHO