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.
IH Admin
I haven't used any profanity whatsoever. I haven't attacked anyone. The horrible sin for which my post was deleted was that I called a rude person "rude" and "dumb". That same person appeared here and cursed the thread and posters.
If calling someone "dumb" is your idea of a personal attach that needs moderating and deleting then in my opinion you are dumb too and I am through posting here.
This had the potential to be an excellent board but the nannys have choked it to death.
You just don't get it do you Ron. If you want to keep deleting posts for the most utterly pety of reason you will be here all alone because everyone will leave. If this is what you want then you will surely succeed. You will be a great success, all alone by yourself. Get it through your head. This is the choice you have to make. Back off or lose your posters.
I'm getting tired of this. I'm ready to move on. It's time you dropped this. As WBMW said, You've been warned. You want to kill this thread just keep on doing what you're doing.
Are you going to answer my questions?
I have deleted your PMs without reading them. If you have questions you can post them here publicly, just like I addressed you.
EP you have two PM's, do you know what those are?
I have addressed you in public, you can do the same.
Anyone who would like to seriously participate in the forming/changeing of the posting rules here at Ihub can make suggestions on this board
Why don't you drop this nonsense? You are the one deleting posts. You are the one who can stop deleting posts. This had the potential of becoming a really popular forum but you have virtually killed it by treating people like children. You either stop over moderating or this thread is dead and you moderators can talk to each other. It's your choice.
Well Greg, I don't know if it was you or someone else who deleted my harmless post but you might as well just push us out the door. If this is the kind of antiseptic forum you want then I guess I might as well go back to SI and find a new alias.
This is absurd.
Thanks Heidegger. That's exactly what we needed right now. A vulgar mindless post that serves no purpose. You're a real genius.
Greg, maybe I should ask my question in a different way. What would happen if someone took the job but was just a bit lazy and didn't notice minor violations? I mean nobody can be there 24 hours a day reading every post and maybe, just maybe, they might miss some minor infractions?
Who would know?
EP
Look, man, just take the job on for size. I'm really getting tired of this.
If someone were to take the position, what would be the consequences of applying the rules I suggested and only those rules?
EP
Greg, why do we need a moderator? The ignore function works perfectly and anyone who doesn't like the conduct of another poster can simply ignore them. What's the problem here? Nobody can reach through my monitor and grab me by the throat. I don't run off crying when someone calls me an idiot. I'm not tramatised for life. Is anyone else here deeply hurt by the ill manners of another? I don't think so.
I suggest that this thread be moderated under these conditions, A post should be deleted if it meets one of the following conditions:
#1 A post so utterly vulgar that it would be considered obscene in most municipalities.
#2 It threatens another person with harm to his/her person or possessions.
#3 Makes a statement that is libelous to the extent that the iHub could be held responsible for leaving it on display.
#4 Is repeatedly so lost and off topic that the post in question adds no value whatsoever to this thread. Key word here is "repeatedly". An example would be the old SI AMD thread which is now just pure politics and nothing to do with AMD.
#5 Makes claims of insider information that would have a significant effect on a companies competitive position as a result of it's posting. Links to other public documents or articles excepted.
Other than that people would be free to express themselves as they see fit and as others choose to endure. That's my opinion.
EP
I also hope that my actions have not caused any of the readership of this board to leave.
Spokeshave, I saw you post and I don't think it should have been deleted. Yes, it did not portray you in the best light but as adults we have to live with criticism and deal with it as adults. I hope you continue posting.
EP
The thread should decide how to govern itself within the site's TOU's.
I think you've already heard the thread's decision. They want the moderators to loosen up.
Time to cool off guys. Let's take a deep breath and drop this for a while.
EP
You may want to consider coming back to SI under another alias. I don't see how SI would know the difference.
Alias?? You don't believe this is my real name?
It's really simple, play nice (like responsible adults) and there will be no problems!
It's really simple. Treat people like children and your website will go the way of the dodo bird. If that's what you want you can moderate each other because everyone else will leave.
EP
I didn't see the offending post so I don't know what was in it, however I certainly hope the moderators are mature enough to allow some interaction between posters. We are adults here and the ignore feature works just fine, I know because I've used it twice already. So please don't treat us like children. I for one can take a little teasing or even an occasional rude comment. You've got to allow some leeway or you'll simply drive people away.
EP
And now with a cloud of dust, and a hardy, Hi! Ho! Silver, the daring and resourceful masked rider of the plane fades off into the sunset.......friggin' curtain.
I hope you'll reconsider.
EP
I don't really care. These rules are open to plenty of interpretation. All I'm saying is that the moderators should keep their distance from the thread, and not interfere with the more benign posts. Yes, "benign" is open for interpretation as well, but I think it will become obvious from multiple posters if something crosses a line where it needs to be moderated.
I second the motion...
I wrote a few puts today on AMD. Oct $2.50s. Chump change but what the heck!
EP
Elmer, this is my estimate for AMD's processor units this quarter.
Thanks for the estimates. I'm going to guess that your lower end numbers are most likely correct. I also think revenues may be lucky to hit $500 million. With low demand and inventory reductions they can't be selling much.
For those who think we are obsessed with AMD, keep in mind they are the only competition Intel has and what happens to AMD directly affects Intel's future. They are very relevent.
EP
When INTC warns with a $500M Revenue miss in the next few weeks can we blame that on yields too?
I'm sure you'll find a way but you won't do it based on any thought out reasoning. Do you not see a difference between a company that makes money compared to one that loses money?
Still you have a point. AMD would be losing big money regardless of their yields because their product isn't competitive anymore and the next generation is nowhere's near ready. Demand would still be as low, even with 100% yields. What it gets down to is that speed (binsplit) is AMD's problem and they are almost undoubtedly scrapping millions of die just because they're too slow.
EP
Intel says no plans to get into DRAM business
SEOUL, Oct 02, 2002 (AFX-Europe via COMTEX) -- Intel Corp chief operating officer Paul Otellini said the company has no plans to enter the DRAM business, rejecting reports the firm may form alliances to jointly construct wafer plants in Taiwan.
Intel has "no intention to get into the DRAM business," Otellini said at a press conference.
Earlier, the Commercial Times cited an unidentified source as saying that Intel Corp is seeking a Taiwan DRAM partner to jointly build two 12-inch-wafer plants in Taiwan within three years.
Driving AMD out of business with overt price wars could have potential anti-trust implications.
It is going to be very hard to convince anyone that Intel is conducting a price war by pricing their product ABOVE AMD's price.
EP
From sell to hold - or - hold to buy - or - buy to super, ultra, put it in the widows and orphans fund and mortgage the farm, never look back, take it to the bank, strong buy?
As I keep saying, in the 20+ years I've been in this industry I've never seen Intel this far ahead of the competition. In fact the word "competition" is barely applicable anymore.
Did you notice that AMD said their Flash division continued to gain strength? That means the losses from the processor division are even worse than first glance.
"While our flash memory business is improving and showed sequential sales growth for the second consecutive quarter, the weakness in the personal computer market continues to impact AMD,"
EP
Will anyone upgrade Intel, on the off chance that AMD doesn't survive?
I will!
Seriously, does anyone seriously believe AMD had no idea things were this bad until today? AMD's standard mode of operation is to insist everything is fine until the very last possible moment. I don't know what they gain anymore by doing this but I guess old habits die hard.
EP
AMD has had a $900M cost structure now for the past several quarters. If they just warned on revenue of $500M, that makes the loss $350M-400M. AMD only has $1100M in cash and short term investments, and that's not including $370M in short term and current long term debt. AMD can only take a couple quarters of this abuse.
AMD may also get stuck with >$100Million of debt for the loan they backed for their Flash partner (Fujitsu?).
The aggressive actions we took to lower the total inventory and align the mix with current opportunities had a significant negative impact on our third quarter processor sales in units, revenues and ASP's.
I thought AMD claimed market share gain?
Going into the fourth quarter, AMD and its customers are in a much-improved position to take advantage of the anticipated seasonal improvement in demand."
Translation: AMD has a huge inventory of unsold material.
EP
I thought that it was fairly common knowledge that for a design change, there will be a significant amount initial and on-going "tweaking" necessary to improve the process. As such, yields will generally improve as the process is improved, but may be poor initially. Am I incorrect in this assumption?
Yes you may be incorrect. The defect density for a process doesn't know you just did a stepping change. Most stepping changes are metal only in which case the effect on yields would not be noticeable unless AMD is scrapping die on the wafer for speed and that is not very reliable. For every full mask layer stepping change, there are usually a number of additional metal only steppings so it should inherit the same yield as it's predecessor.
As for the "best yields in the world", I think that everyone knows that was Sanders hype. That quote is also 2 years old at least.
I prefer to call a lie a lie. Sanders said that no more then 6 months ago.
I claim ignorance because I do not know how much of the Fab's capacity must be dedicated to both Hammer and Barton even though they are not in production. With the long lead times from raw wafers to final product, I would expect that some fraction of the tooling, instruments, floor space, or what have you must be dedicated to those lines. I do not know what that fraction is. You say it is insignificant. Can you provide a reasonable estimate and some reasonable basis for that estimate?
I don't know how much floor space, if any, would need to be reserved exclusively for SOI as separate from the standard process, but for engineering experiments I wouldn't expect the wafer count to be more than a few 10s of wafers to check out a new stepping and maybe a few thousand units for reliability experiments. Those experiments probably wouldn't need to be repeated for additional metal only stepping changes. With Barton on the standard non SOI process it would use the same flow as TB.
The excuse that AMD needs major portions of their Fab capacity for new product/process development was worn out nearly a year ago when AMD zealots were trying to explain away the inexplicably low Fab output when AMD couldn't meet demand. They claimed it was used for .13u material that was in line in Q4. Unfortunately it was 6 months before any of that hypothetical material made it's way out the door in a slow trickle and shot down that attempt to explain away apparent yield problems. Today we are seeing the same excuses resurrected again using smoke and mirrors to come up with an analysis of AMD's fab utilization that doesn't expose a yield crash, at least for SOI.
If TB has decent yields then half the fab is unused. If AMD has half a fab available then why are there no Hammers unless the SOI process has major problems, which AMD has denied, or Hammer has major problems which AMD has also denied. The point being that not all of AMD's statements can be true at the same time. When a company knowingly makes false statements I call it lying, you may use whatever term you choose.
EP
I have no doubt that with the new "B" stepping, there are yield problems and possibly binsplit problems as well, but these are to be expected with a new stepping that contains significant changes.
Why?
I suspect that AMD buys wafers ... Otherwise, UMC would have to have the test capability. UMC wouldn't allow AMD to tell them the number of good die per wafer. However, I imagine that AMD does have a "yield agreement" with UMC that AMD would get financial compensation on wafer price if yield is low.
Very dangerous to seperate sort from the Fab. A process problem could go on for weeks before the customer gets around to sorting the wafers and discovering the problem. Also how would they do low yield analysis and improve the process when they never test the wafers? I've been through that with foundries. Getting meaningful support from the process people is next to impossible. Reliability data is closely guarded so qualification is painful, time consuming and frustrating at best. They have 12 other customers all asking for something different and finger pointing is the rule. It's the process, no it's the design, no it's the test program.... Sheesh what a mistake to go outside...
EP
Which of these do you think are being "manufactured" at UMC ... I can "guess" wants going on there !!
I think AMD can scrap their own wafers cheaper than they can scrap UMC's. Does AMD buy wafers or good die?
EP
Spokesshave, this has been explored ad nausium.
You claim to have no industry knowledge but you didn't get those numbers from out of thin air.
Hammer isn't in production so the engineering capacity consumed is insignificant. Same for Barton. With "The Best Yields in the World" TB should yield upwards of 270 GDPW. AMD sold about 8 million per quarter but until recently many of those were Durons. Nevertheless F30 should be able to produce > 16 million TBs. With actual output <50% of capacity why does AMD claim "normal yield constraints"? How can they be constrained with half their fab free? With 50% of their capacity unutilized surely they could provide a trickling of Bartons or Hammers if they were anywhere's near manufacturable. The elevated ASPs would be a desperately needed to stem the flow of blood yet they are non existent. The only samples of hammer seen run at 800MHz. How many wafers did they need to burn to get those crippled samples? Half their fab? Has anyone seen samples of Barton? Why not if they have so much free space? The easiest explanation is there aren't any Bartons because there aren't any Bartons and the same goes for Hammer.
EP
I cannot intelligently speculate on yields because I just do not have enough information.
Yes you do.
EP
a "constraint" is usually a problem that limits you from achieving an objective. The statement: "constrained by normal yields", means to me that yields are not high enough to achieve AMD's objective. Their objective I believe is to provide CPU in volume and make a profit.
Considering that AMD's fab is capable of upwards of 15 million die per quarter based on the Athlon die size and their claim of "Best Yields in the World", and Clawhammer is certainly no larger, one finds it very hard to understand how AMD ships only a fraction of that number yet still uses the word "constrained" when discussing yields. It implies that yields are constraining their output to about 50% of what it should be. If demand was the constraint then no matter how poor, yields wouldn't be. I think AMD's own words concede major yield problems.
EP
I don't want to continue to beat a dead horse, but you also totally missed the point of my post. I objected solely to the misattribution of quoted material. That's all.
Many of us have been following AMD for years and we've seen a steady stream of misinformation intended to deceive. There was the famous claim of "Best yields in the World" which clearly wasn't true. There was the statement that AMD had "line yields" in the high 90% range in a response to a question about their production yields. There was the time when Jerry boldly told shareholders AMD's yield problems had been fixed, dumped a ton of stock and sheepishly admitted yield problems still existed. You take issue with Yousef's translation of AMD's balony as a misquote but I see his quotation marks as simply adding emphasis to the essence of AMD's statement. AMD has lied over and over again and you even seem to be agreeing that they're probably lying here too. Why not criticize them?
EP
wbmw -
An interesting observation:
The team Intel Seti group shows that Intel's Solaris Lab is very busy and generating lots and lots of activity. The numbers suggest Intel is running over 350 systems continuously. Why would Intel have a Solaris lab and why would it have so many systems running? Any significance to this???
http://iron.mine.nu/teamrank.cgi?t=229&english
EP
Thank you for your consideration of this matter and I apologize for my over reaction. You're a reasonable person.
EP
Why not just offer the option of saying "no thanks" or letting me fill out my age etc but not personal information about my finances? I'm sorry I offended you and maybe my response was a bit harsh but you didn't seem very concerned about me either when you locked me out until I told you my finances. How would you have reacted?
Your specific answers will not be forwarded to any advertiser. I just need to be able to tell them things like what percentage of folks fall into which age ranges, income ranges, genders, etc. They get only the compiled data, not the individual data. I tried to make the survey pretty painless and it only happens once. If a short, one-time survey is too much to handle, I just don't know what to say. But I need the data. Really not bad considering you only have to fill out about 5 fields to join the site to begin with.
Nevertheless you force me to answer the questions, I am not given a choice. This is no way to treat paying customers.
You can rest assured that I answered every question exactly wrong and I hope other paying customers who are forced to provide personal information about income, net worth etc, do the same.
EP