Replies to post #101790 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[Elmer Phud]

If the competitor's product is lower performance or less efficient, that goes along with that choice.

It goes way beyond that. The competitor's products could be less reliable. Their execution to schedule could stink. Their ability to supply in volume may be limited and inconsistent. Their technical support may be sub par. Their reference platforms could be inferior. Their marketing co-payments may be non existent. Their product roadmap may be uninspiring. Their process roadmap may be delayed. The list goes on. Our apologist friends would never consider these possibilities because "parts is parts".

Think Walmart.

[fastpathguru]

When an OEM comes to Intel asking for a price reduction in response to a competitive bid, it's absolutely legal for Intel to reduce the price to compete, as long as that price doesn't fall below cost.

Tell it to chipguy, who asserts the payments were marketing subsidies.

Tell it to Elmer, who ignores the implications of Chuck Mulloy's explanation of MCP: I.e. it took Intel six billion dollars to make Intel's chicken mcnuggets look more attractive than AMD's.

Intel can also refuse to lower the price, and the OEM can choose to buy from Intel's competitor. If the competitor's product is lower performance or less efficient, that goes along with that choice.

I guess Intel didn't have that option.

fpg