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.
sonic_blue,
Earlier I had described what much of what the AMD fanatics post as "regurgitation". I now submit proof. Check out this post from Doug on the AMD IHub thread.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2408240
It is a post from DOUG to DOUG referencing DOUG on Silicon Investor.
Hilarious. They establish a rumor and spread it among themselves, often as in this case, to oneself. They then tells us how "everyone" is of the same opinion and therefore what was originally a fantasy in an AMD fanatics brain has now become fact.
LOL
IMHO
Facs,
I sound happy, isn't that very clear
No, it is not clear you are happy. In fact you sound worse.
Itanium is not a joke. You think you know it all. Post a link to your prediction that IBM would embrace Intel’s new 64 bit extensions. You can not. Post a link that IBM has decided to drop the Itanium. You can not. Post a link that HP has dropped the Itanium. You can not. You are in denial, my friend. Post a link or don’t post at all.
As for the prediction that Itanium would be brought to the masses, that was never the case. Post a link that Intel itself made these claims. I can only recall speculation that Itanium could come to the masses and only after as much as a decade into the future. This is an eternity in technology and only the AMD fanatics (and their media surrogates) are dumb enough to equate speculation (i.e. fiction) with fact. I will give you some ammunition to use against me. I predict that within 12 months after it ships, SUN will adopt Intel’s 64 bit CPU. Do you predict otherwise? Say so. You will not because you are worried.
So now your theory on Intel bossing MSFT around has been torn to shreds.
You are delusional. Post where I said that Intel is bossing anyone, much less MSFT around. You misunderstood or are making this up. You and your AMD fanatics see every Intel move as confrontational. It never occurs to you that Intel, listens, negotiates and adapts to the benefit of its shareholders. You are also making up that MSFT told Intel they would have to follow AMD-64. More likely, Intel and MSFT agreed a long time ago how to proceed with 64 bit extensions. MSFT statements to the effect of a single OS for 64-bit extensions is a product of that agreement. This is why Intel has its product ready to ship next quarter.
cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching
LOL. Now you are hearing bells?
IMHO
Facs,
You sound worried. You should be.
With all the AMD advantages that you and Doug keep regurgitating on this forum, the bottom line is that AMD squeaked out a measly profit after countless losses. Itanium's future is secure, as it IS and ALWAYS has been a niche market. It was people like you and Doug who compare a carrier to pleasure boat and gloat at all the deficiencies you find in the carrier. It does not matter anymore. It now comes down to who can manufacture and sell into the SAME market space. And guess who has succeeded in the past, and who is destined to fail in the future. With MSFT firmly in Intel's back pocket, I predict your anger at Intel and your posts on this forum will all go up. I hope your losses in AMD do not.
IMHO
ps. You are on an Intel forum. We are going to out cha-ching you.
Mysef,
Before you get carried away,
Another misguided observation.
Why do you think GTW is up today? Could it be a change in management?
I do not follow GTW all that much. It could be because of management. It could be because of the eMachine deal. It could be because the Mars Opportunity did not crash on landing.
While you're here, do you think GTW will use AMD processors again?
Yes, so? Throughout the years AMD has sold to just about every OEM out there. Not much has changed with respect to Intel or AMD for that matter. AMD is still struggling to establish itself as a profitable company, and Intel is still trying to remain the top dog. Do you think GTW will stop using Intel processors?
IMHO
wbmw,
I sort of appreciate off topic posts once in a while
Nothing wrong with it. I took exception to Mysef trying to link the relevence of GTW stock performance to anything about Intel. Good luck with your purchase.
IMHO
Mysef,
Gateway? Hey dude, this is the Intel thread, who cares about GTW stock price? BTW, it's looking better than you think, as I type this. Remember, you are the misguided poster who brought up the subject of GTW in a miserable effort to prop up your view of AMD.
Stop talking to yousef, myself.
IMHO
jhalada,
Your response indicates to me that you didn't finish reading my message to the end.
I read it and I come to the conclusion that you think, "The financial well being of Intel depends on selling microprocessors at high prices." I disagree.
IMHO
jhalada,
The financial well being of Intel depends on selling microprocessors at high prices.
Narrow-minded view IMHO. It is more accurate to say that the financial well being of Intel depends on selling microprocessors for a profit. Think about that. Then, think about AMD.
IMHO
Mysef,
If Intel and DELL wants to be on the bottom, it looks like they made it.
Good observation. What Intel wants Intel eventualy gets.
eMachines has passed Gateway in marketshare and is selling Athlon64 desktop and laptop models.
Why don't you tell us that eMachines has passed Whirlpool and Hotpoint also. LOL. I bet you Gateway sells a lot more TV/PC entertainment systems. Maybe because that is what Gateway is focusing its business on?
Intel got what they wanted, they ran AMD out of the low end processor business.
Well, thanks for admiting AMD's failure in this important area of the market. Not to mention AMD's failure of the "volume is our vaccine" and segmentation strategies; you know the one that Intel is in the process of implementing to send AMD back into the basement.
Stop talking to yousef, mysef. Or...maybe you should :)
IMHO
sgolds,
you seem to be in denial
Denial of what? I said Intel will not only match, but trump AMD's instruction set. You do not think it is possible for Intel to do this? Say so.
After all the waiting, AMD finally has played it's best card. It is a good one. Intel is now formulating a response. I think they will have an answer.
IMHO
sgolds,
Intel endorses AMD64? That is the rumor this week, that Intel will announce support with product in 2005. That will make Opteron and Athlon64 instant successes
Sure, Intel endorses AMD64. Get real.
More likely, Intel will create a superset of the AMD64 and call it their own. Endorsed by Microsoft, it will make the instruction limited "hot-pteron" an instant failure.
IMHO
not my ideas - it's his ideas
Yes, but it was your idea to select that article, out of so many, to post. You must think the article had some merit.
I don't necesarily agree with them
Sure. You post something you don't agree with, with no comments of your own to clarify the purpose of your post. That makes a lot of sense. LOL.
IMHO
Now's the tough part
Let's see; of all the pro and con articles written about Intel's earnings, you selecet a negative one, easily shown to be baseless in fact. I am being kind in saying, do us a favor and change your handle or at least get some COMMON SENSE.
IMHO
CPA Advice:
1. Dont invest, client does not invest, stock goes down. Correct.
2. Dont invest, client invests, stock goes down, CPA correct.
3 Dont invest, client invest, stock goes up, CPA just being careful.
4. Doent Invest, client does not invest, stock goes up, CPA just being carefull
NO Lose situation.
One more,
CPA Advice: Dont invest, client invests, stock goes sideways. CPA correct; could have done better elsewhere.
IMHO
Keith,
Excuse me..
You are excused. I did not mean to say you did anything wrong or with any intent.
I haven´t seen anything today that has dissapointed me in any way.
I find that hard to believe, but that is my problem ;)
Apple, Sun? I do get the impression that you don´t really know what you´re talking about.
Fine. Next time such rumors about Apple and Sun appear on this board, can we expect you to chime in with a similar rebutal?
And if you invest based on Inquirer stories and "diehard AMDer´s" tales, you´re lost already.
No I do not.
IMHO
j3pflyn,
from what I've heard about the ramp, these are about all AMD can support for now. I expect we'll hear more coming on board as the supply grows.
That is my guess also. But many AMD well wishers do not hesitate to give the impression of enough supply to reel in more than a few big OEM's at launch. Still, given the limitted supply, it is interesting to see who was in and who was left out.
IMHO
Keith,
Athlon64 launch partners - expectations
I must have read some 50+ articles on the subject by now, and the only names I´ve seen mentioned were Alienware, Northgate (sold @ Costco) and Hp (with some sort of availability later in the year) to sell Athlon64. Other small players are expected to be on board too, but the press and analysts are apparently not aware of any other names. Quite a few analysts expect no tier one support at all. It will be interesting to see if these expectations will turn out to be correct :)
From the tone of the above post, I thought you knew something we did'nt. Where are IBM, Sun, Sony, Toshiba, Dell, Gateway, or even Apple? Sure Dell and even Gateway and Apple were a stretch, but all have been rumored as possible partners by diehard AMDers and even The InQ. At least one of these OEM's would have been great. Rather disappointing don't you think?
IMHO
kpf,
wbmw: "Any collapse in microprocessor demand is going to affect AMD far more than Intel, just as it has in the past."
kpf: "That is certainly true for today - and will remain so until AMD will be firmly established in corporate markets and in AMD-64 brand-awareness."
It is actually more dire for AMD today. Not only is a collapse in demand a problem for AMD, but keep in mind that Intel has added lots of capacity (to the private chagrin and public ridicule of AMD'ers). It will take a lot more demand today, than in the past, for it to trickle down to AMD. I may be proven wrong on this, if AMD, like Intel, will announce a better than expected Q3. Has not happend yet and they said that September was "make or break". We will see.
BTW, I don't consider the following to be such an announcement from AMD, because "He (Ruiz) left unchanged the company's third-quarter forecasts and declined to say when AMD is targeting profitability."
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030923/tech_amd_outlook_2.html
IMHO
Dan3,
P4 Emergency Edition
Very funny! Here is something funnier.
It's an "emergency", alright, for AMD. Who is busy calling "911", and the patient is the Athlon64.
LOL
borusa,
Don't kill the messenger because you don't like the news.
I am not killing the messenger, I am questioning the message because I find the messengers logic faulty. Consider the following.
In reliable communications, one envelopes a message by some sort of CRC or checksum. If the checksum does not check, the message is tossed out. Well, in my view, Dan3 embodies the CRC/Checksum envelope. His message is about Bapco(for example). I question his logic and disregard his message. You find this wrong?
Your response to me about Bapco is meaningless. I will let you have the final word on this, and hopefully you can address the real issue; Dan3's logic of assuming an accusation is fact because one does not deny the accusation.
IMHO
Dan3,
They released the information about the fraud that had been bapco, and Intel never let out so much as a peep about the acusation that Intel had been defrauding customers with rigged benchmarks. Had there been any explanation other than the obvious one - Intel was a crooked company...
This is the second time in a few days you use this "logic" to prove your facts. Here is the other:
It's well documented fact, and Intel hasn't dared to contadict it.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1308302
So since Intel does not respond to every accusation thown its way, the accusations are true and so they become "facts". Give me a break.
Let's see, it was not OJ, the fact is, it was Andy Grove, since we have yet to see Andy deny it.
Here's another fact. Jerry Sanders posts on SI and IHub. Unless you show me a link or a "post" were he denies it :)
IMHO
sgolds,
"Dew, your example is good but your logic is incorrect."
Maybe. But his math is off, see my post to Dew.
"Your example correctly showed that, by GAAP, earnings per share dropped from .50 to .48 because of dilution."
Again, I don't think so. 0.048 is not .48, unless I missing something.
IMHO
Dew,
"Consider a simple example of a company which has a net worth of $1B, 100M diluted shares outstanding, annual earnings of $50M, and an annual expansion of 5% in the diluted share count from option exercises. The book value of this company at our starting time is the net worth divided by the diluted share count: $1B/100M = $10/sh.
Under GAAP, this company would appear to be profitable during the year in question because its EPS would be $50M/1.05B = $0.048."
Are you sure about this? Given your numbers for this example, shouldn't EPS be $50M/100M = 0.50 $/sh?
If this is an error, does this affect your argument?
IMHO