It's apparent to me that you, like Neelie the Terrible and now Andrew Cuomo, are starting from that conclusion, then working feverishly to develop arguments to support it.
What conclusion is that? Your strawman "Any volume discount Intel gives to customers is a bribe to stay away from AMD" conclusion?
Simple volume discounts are not anti-competitive. Intel has not been accused of giving away simple volume discounts. Simple volume discounts wouldn't change per-customer or have other conditions attached... They've been accused of giving away rebates designed specifically to exclude AMD from the market that have no other economic justification, among other things.
Never mind the fact that your line of thinking could and would find ANY market leader to be "guilty" of antitrust violations.
My line of thinking is that anti-competitive (in the legal sense) rebates violate antitrust laws... So unless EVERY market leader is using such rebates, your assertion is incorrect, a concept further reflected by the plain reality fact that very very few market leaders are being accused of antitrust violations.
But keep pushing the notion that anyone is "throwing Dell under the bus." That can only come from someone who treats this like a political pissing match.
Context Tenchu, context. I was responding to Tecate's assertion that Intel could easily prove that Dell's problems (i.e. the competitive issues they complained about in the emails contained in the NYAG's suit) were of their own making (shoddy products and poor customer service) and not because Intel's chips were putting Dell at a competitive disadvantage.
I.e. throwing Dell under the bus.
Complain to Tecate, not me.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
