Replies to post #81662 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[Elmer Phud]

Who is speculating? The application of the Discount Attribution/Equally Efficient Competitor standards is not speculation, it is the core of the EC case.

I didn't say you were speculating, I offered you the chance to do so.

The application of the Discount Attribution/Equally Efficient Competitor standards is not the core of the EUC case as far as I can see. They said the contracts are clean. It is the claim that there were verbal agreements or "bribes" as you wish to characterize them that cause the standard to be applied to the small percentage of market share the EUC characterizes as open to competition with AMD. Why the entire market isn't considered open to competition with AMD is a question which remains avoided by you.

BTW, I see nothing wrong with speculation as long as it is presented as such.

[Windsock]

The core of the EC pursuit of Intel is the desire of the Trade Commissioner to regulate market share -- nothing more, nothing less. The rest is just a bunch of fluff and nonsense to disguise the regulation as modern "economic theory".

A really interesting problem for regulating Intel's market share will present itself about 2 years from now when AMD has run through the injection of capital from Abu Dhabi and goes Tango Uniform. Bye, bye "Efficient Competitor". Intel can comply with any restrictions the EC can impose and still AMD will continue to bleed cash because consumers don't want to purchase AMD's products at anything but fire sale prices.