Hector Ruiz's book

dbcoopernz

Member
Aug 10, 2012
68
4
71
Former AMD Chief’s Book Describes Fight Against Intel

Advanced Micro Devices for years accused Intel of illegal tactics in the market for microprocessor chips, a dispute that many people may have forgotten. Hector Ruiz wants the story remembered.

The former AMD chief has written a book that memorializes his bet-the-company decision in 2005 to file an antitrust case against its much larger rival, a volume of roughly 200 pages that comes with heavy doses of David versus Goliath imagery. It’s called “Slingshot,” and subtitled “AMD’s Fight To Free An Industry From The Ruthless Grip Of Intel.”

Intel never admitted wrong-doing, either in the suit brought by AMD or in other antitrust cases or investigations pursued by multiple government agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission. It did pay AMD $1.25 billion as part of a 2009 settlement, after Ruiz had left the company.
“We don’t believe that we violated any law and consumers benefited from our business practices,” said Chuck Mulloy, an Intel spokesman.

Ruiz, who hails from a small town in Mexico, elaborates on his humble upbringing as well as advice and lessons learned from relatives and teachers. Despite early difficulties mastering English, he did well in Texas schools–including a doctorate from Rice University. He worked at Texas Instruments TXN +0.21% and Motorola Inc. MSI +0.51% before joining AMD in 2000.

Much of the book deals with why Ruiz took the risk of attacking Intel in court, an effort called Project Slingshot. The companies had legal battles as early as the 1980s, but the conflict in the last decade came after AMD introduced a particularly strong lineup of chips but failed to gain as much market share as expected. The book cites multiple examples of big U.S. and Asian PC makers getting excited about using AMD’s products, only to back away or reduce their commitments under what Ruiz describes as Intel financial inducements or threats.

The examples, and quotations from internal company emails, may seem familiar to those who followed the various legal documents released by AMD, the FTC, the state of New York and antitrust regulators in Europe, Japan and South Korea. But the book adds details on how Ruiz and other AMD executives developed their legal strategies.

There are also insights into other developments during Ruiz’s tenure. “Slingshot,” for example, states that Nvidia NVDA +2.91% had been AMD’s first preference to buy to add graphics-chip expertise, a possibility Ruiz says foundered on high price and the requirement that Nvidia’s chief take over leadership of AMD. (An Nvidia spokesman declined comment). AMD eventually purchased ATI Technologies.

Other details concern AMD’s negotiations for financial help from Abu Dhabi, an effort that stalled until some helpful match-making by a member of the Ferrari sports car family (Investors in the oil-rich country had purchased a stake in Ferrari, and AMD had sponsored one of its race cars).

The introduction helped lead to a meeting with Abu Dhabi’s crown prince and lengthy negotiations with others there, aimed at spinning off AMD’s manufacturing operations and making the country a new force in global chip production. It also led to what Ruiz says was one of the most difficult moments in his career; he decided he had to join the manufacturing company to reassure the investors about his commitment.

“If the Abu Dhabi deal were to fall through, AMD would not survive,” Ruiz writes. “I had to do everything in my control to make it happen.”
The deal relieved AMD of the costs of running factories. The resulting company, now called Globalfoundries, has prominent operations in upstate New York, Germany, Silicon Valley and Asia.

(The book doesn’t mention that Ruiz became publicly associated with the Galleon insider-trading case; the Wall Street Journal in November 2009 identified him as an AMD executive accused in a federal complaint of sharing advance information about the chip-manufacturing venture. He was not accused of wrongdoing, but stepped down a couple of months earlier than expected as Globalfoundries’ chairman).

AMD has had a bumpy road since Ruiz left. He points out that AMD reported three years of annual profits after the Intel settlement in November 2009. But it finished 2012 with a loss of nearly $1.2 billion.

And Ruiz found the settlement disappointing. “Although I never expected the lawsuit to go to trial, I harbored hopes that Intel would admit wrong-doing,” he writes. “I also believed AMD merited damages well beyond the $1.25 billion.”

Ruiz found more satisfaction in the subsequent FTC settlement, which contained restrictions on Intel’s behavior, and the more spiritual benefits of simply doing what AMD employees were convinced was the right thing.

“Project Slingshot had been a battle cry for our people at AMD to rally around a just cause, to fight a fight no one but us believed we could win,” Ruiz writes. “We blew the top off of the industry and exposed its unsavory secrets in a way that forced Intel and computer makers to back off their backroom deals, clean up their act and refocus on what really mattered: the customer.”

But Intel executives have said the concessions to the FTC really didn’t have much impact on its business. And the changes certainly haven’t been sufficient to counteract AMD’s struggles in the marketplace.

AMD’s share in the relevant market for microprocessors peaked at 25.3% in the fourth quarter of 2006, with Intel accounting for 74.4%, according to Mercury Research. By the fourth quarter of 2012, AMD’s share had slid to 14.7%, compared with Intel’s 84.8%.

“Slingshot,” which is co-written with journalist Lauren Villagran, is set for publication April 23.
 

MisterMac

Senior member
Sep 16, 2011
777
0
0
I get the feeling this is his - "Look i' was right - and i did the right thing! - you can't handle the truth!" - type of moment.


Would anyone wager if he has some good arguments to his side of the story?
Would he have stayed on-board with AMD if - Abu Dhabi didn't demand it?
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
59
91
Much of the book deals with why Ruiz took the risk of attacking Intel in court, an effort called Project Slingshot.

Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?

Sounds like classic effort at history-revisionism. Blame everything but himself. Blame Nvidia for the the Nvidia deal falling through. Blame Intel for market competition that was too difficult to navigate.

Ignore the decisions Hector made, and the one's he opted not to make, that contributed to AMD's situation. Ignore the illegal activities he felt were a higher priority for his time instead of spending that time actually doing his job as CEO of the company.

Doesn't matter though, this guy will just keep adding zeros to his bank balance because despite his personal failings there are people out there who have no problem rewarding that kind of behavior, as his history tells it.
 

djgandy

Member
Nov 2, 2012
78
0
0
Hector Ruiz- "How to tank a CPU company"

Yeah, Hector was a poor CEO, I'm not saying Intel are angels, but this guy was not focused on the core business at all. Was it Intel that forced him to blow $5.4B on ATI and put AMD into so much debt?

He was the guy running the show when AMD prematurely started sandbagging after doing so well with Athlon 64. AMD had a technical advantage for many years, but really didn't do much to improve performance beyond multi-core.

AMD's arrogance showed when Core 2 Duo turned up. They did not expect Intel to make such huge performance gains over Pentium 4, and the result showed in AMD's offerings for the next 2 years.

The funny thing is that Intel's trick up it's sleeve was there all along for everyone to see, in the form of Pentium M.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,378
126
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?

Sounds like classic effort at history-revisionism. Blame everything but himself. Blame Nvidia for the the Nvidia deal falling through. Blame Intel for market competition that was too difficult to navigate.

Ignore the decisions Hector made, and the one's he opted not to make, that contributed to AMD's situation. Ignore the illegal activities he felt were a higher priority for his time instead of spending that time actually doing his job as CEO of the company.

Doesn't matter though, this guy will just keep adding zeros to his bank balance because despite his personal failings there are people out there who have no problem rewarding that kind of behavior, as his history tells it.

+1
 

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
Gotta love how the destroyer portraits himself as the saviour.

It's quite telling that years after his tenure at AMD, when writing a book, Ruiz has to focus on the Intel settlement, something that depended heavily on regulatory agencies around the world pressuring Intel over the issue.
 

dqniel

Senior member
Mar 13, 2004
650
0
76
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?

Sounds like classic effort at history-revisionism. Blame everything but himself. Blame Nvidia for the the Nvidia deal falling through. Blame Intel for market competition that was too difficult to navigate.

Ignore the decisions Hector made, and the one's he opted not to make, that contributed to AMD's situation. Ignore the illegal activities he felt were a higher priority for his time instead of spending that time actually doing his job as CEO of the company.

Doesn't matter though, this guy will just keep adding zeros to his bank balance because despite his personal failings there are people out there who have no problem rewarding that kind of behavior, as his history tells it.

Exactly.

And like you said, he'll still keep growing his bank account because people allow it.
 

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
“If the Abu Dhabi deal were to fall through, AMD would not survive,” Ruiz writes. “I had to do everything in my control to make it happen.”

Which included placing himself as CEO of GloFo.

Hector never did anything for the good of AMD, all he did was enrich himself.
 

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?

Sounds like classic effort at history-revisionism. Blame everything but himself. Blame Nvidia for the the Nvidia deal falling through. Blame Intel for market competition that was too difficult to navigate.

Ignore the decisions Hector made, and the one's he opted not to make, that contributed to AMD's situation. Ignore the illegal activities he felt were a higher priority for his time instead of spending that time actually doing his job as CEO of the company.

Doesn't matter though, this guy will just keep adding zeros to his bank balance because despite his personal failings there are people out there who have no problem rewarding that kind of behavior, as his history tells it.

+2
 

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,980
597
126
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?
You honestly think dragging Intel into court was risk free? :confused:

As for Ruiz, I'll give him one thing, he had the balls to take on Intel head on, and it took even bigger balls to take Intel to court over their illegal practices. Unfortunately Meyer settled for a ridiculously low amount, the damages paid should have been 10 fold or more.
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,135
832
136
You honestly think dragging Intel into court was risk free? :confused:

As for Ruiz, I'll give him one thing, he had the balls to take on Intel head on, and it took even bigger balls to take Intel to court over their illegal practices.
So what were the risks for brave Hector?

He knew the economics of the industry were changing and that if the cross licensing agreement with Intel couldn't be changed to allow them to be fabless, they were done for.

Thus Project Slingshot was concocted to spin a tale of how AMD's own incompetencies had nothing to do with their predicament and that it was all big bad Intel not playing fair. :rolleyes:

Unfortunately Meyer settled for a ridiculously low amount, the damages paid should have been 10 fold or more.
They settled because they had a weak case.

In a proper court of law where witnesses can be called and evidence cross examined, AMD's bogus claims would have been exposed.
 

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,980
597
126
Bogus claim? LOL okay. There have been many bogus lawsuits over the years, but this was not one of them. In fact I doubt you will ever find a more clear example of a company outright bribing suppliers not to use their competitors products.
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,135
832
136
Good God, the man who destroyed AMD, is now writing a self serving book to absolve himself of all blame and AMD fans are lining up to buy it. :rolleyes:

Cult like stuff. D:
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
59
91
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?
You honestly think dragging Intel into court was risk free? :confused:

As for Ruiz, I'll give him one thing, he had the balls to take on Intel head on, and it took even bigger balls to take Intel to court over their illegal practices. Unfortunately Meyer settled for a ridiculously low amount, the damages paid should have been 10 fold or more.

Where did I say it was risk free?

I asked what risk there was. If you can shed some light on that question I'd be grateful. If you just want to pick at me for even asking the question then that is something else entirely in terms of conversation end-game.

In theory, conspiracy theory that is, one could make the leap of faith and claim Intel was willing to take out a hit with the Russian Mob on Ruiz as one of the risks Ruiz undertook in taking Intel to court. I am surely aware there are risks to be fathomed and conjectured.

But I was more curious as to the non-loony kind of risks that presumably Ruiz is referring to. It is the first I have heard of it, so I asked in hopes of someone cluing me in. Feel free to be that helpful person, or not, its your choice.
 

Centauri

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2002
1,630
56
91
Good God, the man who destroyed AMD, is now writing a self serving book to absolve himself of all blame and AMD fans are lining up to buy it. :rolleyes:

Cult like stuff. D:

Hey, look, the guy who posts solely to smack at AMD doesn't like the idea of a book by one of its most influential CEOs! Ringing endorsement!
 
Last edited:

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,332
5,387
136
Good God, the man who destroyed AMD, is now writing a self serving book to absolve himself of all blame and AMD fans are lining up to buy it. :rolleyes:

Cult like stuff. D:

:rolleyes: You can be interested in an insider's perspective without believing or buying into everything he says, never mind supporting him.
 

Centauri

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2002
1,630
56
91
Indeed.

I hated Chrysler once upon a time. Then I read a book on them. Now I like them and have an appreciation for the story that the company's history tells.

Attacking your own ignorance with things like books is generally a really good thing.
 

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,980
597
126
Where did I say it was risk free?
You certainly made it sound like the risk was minimal or nonexistent.
Risk? What risk was there in taking Intel to court?
I asked what risk there was. If you can shed some light on that question I'd be grateful.
The risk was tremendous. For starters, the financial drain was something Intel could easily absorb, AMD could not. The longer the case went on, the more it hurt AMD. Another huge factor was if AMD lost, that would essentially give Intel the green light to continue their illegal practices. Also AMD gained some major concessions from the lawsuit, such as being able to fab x86 products outside of factories not owned by them. If AMD had gone to court and lost, no such concessions would have taken place, and AMD would have been pretty much out of the x86 business for good. AMD might have tried to use TSMC and GloFo anyway, Intel would have sued them for breach of contract.

Even though the settlement itself IMO was way, way too low, it did allow AMD to ink a new deal. It cannot be stated enough, the critical points of concession on the part of Intel were vital to AMD continuing to produce x86 products.
If you just want to pick at me for even asking the question then that is something else entirely in terms of conversation end-game.
I was just surprised that anyone would ask such a question. Taking a cash rich, dominant competitor to court is of course going to be filled with risk. But no risk no reward, which is why I view was Ruiz did as being ballsy.
In theory, conspiracy theory that is, one could make the leap of faith and claim Intel was willing to take out a hit with the Russian Mob on Ruiz as one of the risks Ruiz undertook in taking Intel to court. I am surely aware there are risks to be fathomed and conjectured.
Well, I don't think Ruiz was genuinely fearing for his life due to his actions. I would prefer to keep the discussion in the realm of reality, there is no conspiracy talk needed involving this case, what Intel did was blatantly illegal.

One point people need to remember with crystal clarity. Intel viewed it less of a financial hit to funnel billions to the likes of Dell, rather than let AMD gain a foothold. This fact alone very clearly illustrates how concerned Intel was that AMD reach a critical mass in market share to where there is no going back. They said as much in their internal memos.
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,135
832
136
Hey, look, the guy who posts solely to smack at AMD doesn't like the idea of a book by one of its most influential CEOs! Ringing endorsement!
LOL Sounds like you wish you could have been Danielle Chiesi.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
24,152
13,645
136
Bogus claim? LOL okay. There have been many bogus lawsuits over the years, but this was not one of them. In fact I doubt you will ever find a more clear example of a company outright bribing suppliers not to use their competitors products.

.. hrmm microsoft ? but yea.