Nvidia or IBM to acquire AMD ?

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Intel hasn't worked with developing FinFet if so I would very much like a link to it.

So you are saying that Intel is going to do 32nm the same as 45nm. NO ultraviolet lithography. I thought either this process or immersion process was going to be employed at 32nm.

EUV is definitely a sub-32nm node deployment. 32nm will be immersion litho. For EUV to be a 32nm possibility you'd need to see ASML or Nikon be announcing production tools are shipping already, not beta tools. This is why Intel did not even release 45nm with immersion litho, the suppliers simply weren't production ready in time to meet the timeline.

I'm not saying Intel will do the same at 32nm as they did at 45nm. I am saying things they markedly changing at 45nm relative to 65nm will intentionally not be markedly changed at 32nm relative to 45nm.

They will markedly change things at 32nm which were not markedly changed at 45nm. This is the iterative step-wise nature of balancing R&D budgets with expected lifetime from the inventions. You do everything in parallel, but you stagger the timeline for deliverables in 2-node increments.

Without explaining the entire process integration development process it is hard to communicate the situation in detail. Regardless you do have history to fall back on to see what Intel has done historically, and there is no real impetus for them to change this model now.

You have the disadvantage of only seeing the industry thru well manicured press releases and what filters down to the consumer level. Reality is a far stranger and more exotic beast when you are on the otherside of the door, decisions are made for marketing purposes and less on the timing of scientific breakthrus.

That is, afterall, the entire purpose of press-releases. Press releases serve absolutely no benefit to the consumer or to the product being created, it is entirely about shaping public perception to your liking. And unless you work on the inside you have little reason to suspect anything else.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Man You make me work hard fella. I love it tho. I am simply going to ask you to read that link above in my 2nd to last post above. Intel already has a pilot line set up . For EUV


Ok I can relate to being on the outside looking in. The 60's were great LOL

 

[Idontcare]

I recommend reading this PR piece, it will give you some insight into the decision making that goes into releasing new technology versus balancing the need for the technology.

While it is an Intel PR item, I haven't met an IDM employee in the decision loop that doesn't think this way as second-nature (i.e. this is pretty generic management type stuff for the industry)

Coincidentally, EUV is the case-study here, so the same Intel PR piece serves two purposes here.

http://www.intel.com/technolog...-risk/4-case-study.htm

Note the timeline for EUV is pegged to no earlier than 22nm in 2011 (it's buried in the discussions page).

 

[heyheybooboo]

Does this mean we have to change the name to I B DAAMMIT ??

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Does this mean we have to change the name to I B DAAMMIT ??

Ha ha, its better than I B BROKE

But seriously have you seen how god-awful these spin-off and re-spin names get these days? NXP? (previously Philips) Freescale? (spun-off from Motorola)

Lord knows how aweful a name the new AMD entity would become.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
http://www.intel.com/technolog...-risk/4-case-study.htm

Note the timeline for EUV is pegged to no earlier than 22nm in 2011 (it's buried in the discussions page).

Nemesis I came across this news on EETimes, not good for the EUV roadmaps...

Intel delays procurement of EUV tool

And at the risk of derailing this thread even further into an EUV conversation, here's another good article discussing the existing challenges to making EUV a production worthy tool:

High-volume manufacturing requirements drive EUV source development

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Samsung would make for an interesting twist indeed.

Indeed it would!
Something for everyone to keep in mind though is that the sale of the company isn't a decision that Hector alone can make...they would need the approval of the shareholders.
As someone who currently owns a nice little chunk of AMD, I can assure you that the price we shareholders would demand would be nowhere near where the stock is at right now.
If AMD was offered something in the upper $20s, I'm sure talks could begin...but I doubt they would agree to anything below $30/share.

How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Samsung would make for an interesting twist indeed.

Indeed it would!
Something for everyone to keep in mind though is that the sale of the company isn't a decision that Hector alone can make...they would need the approval of the shareholders.
As someone who currently owns a nice little chunk of AMD, I can assure you that the price we shareholders would demand would be nowhere near where the stock is at right now.
If AMD was offered something in the upper $20s, I'm sure talks could begin...but I doubt they would agree to anything below $30/share.

How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

Mark to market is a bitch, you can bet Abu Dhabi offered exactly the PPS they did for all the right reasons, and AMD accepted the PPS from Abu Dhabi for all the right reasons as well.

Emotion does not make for a valid mark-to-market valuation. Ask Yahoo's board of directors about this in 365 days.

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Samsung would make for an interesting twist indeed.

Indeed it would!
Something for everyone to keep in mind though is that the sale of the company isn't a decision that Hector alone can make...they would need the approval of the shareholders.
As someone who currently owns a nice little chunk of AMD, I can assure you that the price we shareholders would demand would be nowhere near where the stock is at right now.
If AMD was offered something in the upper $20s, I'm sure talks could begin...but I doubt they would agree to anything below $30/share.

How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

Mark to market is a bitch, you can bet Abu Dhabi offered exactly the PPS they did for all the right reasons, and AMD accepted the PPS from Abu Dhabi for all the right reasons as well.

Emotion does not make for a valid mark-to-market valuation. Ask Yahoo's board of directors about this in 365 days.

I pretty sure all that that means something, but you lost me at the first sentence. It appears as though you're repudiating my comments, easy to do given my limited knowledge of the market, but not very educational for me. Would mind translating that into something a contractor might understand?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman
How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

Mark to market is a bitch, you can bet Abu Dhabi offered exactly the PPS they did for all the right reasons, and AMD accepted the PPS from Abu Dhabi for all the right reasons as well.

Emotion does not make for a valid mark-to-market valuation. Ask Yahoo's board of directors about this in 365 days.

I pretty sure all that that means something, but you lost me at the first sentence. It appears as though you're repudiating my comments, easy to do given my limited knowledge of the market, but not very educational for me. Would mind translating that into something a contractor might understand?

Quite the opposite actually, I was adding more fuel to the fire of questioning Viditor's logic that current AMD shareholders would hold-out for $30/share (price per share = PPS).

My point was Abu Dhabi was willing to only pay about $12.25/share, and AMD's board of directors (BOD) took the offer. Abu Dhabi would have invested a lot of money into very smart financial folks who in turn had access to all manner of internal financial documents at AMD that non of us common folk have access to...and when they boild that all down they concluded the company was worth $12.25/share.

And then AMD's BOD looked at their books, their future product lineups, and the arguments that Abu Dhabi's folks made to justify their $12.25/share offer...and the BOD concluded YES we will take it!

So is $30/share a rational PPS? The existing data from near recent market activity says no, no its not. If it were then AMD's BOD would have held out for more, and Abu Dhabi would have offered more than the $12 they offered.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21840227/

 

[heyheybooboo]

I think $30 pps is a little high. I think an arguement for $20 pps, a little higher, could probably be reasonably made.

AMD is like the Keystone Cops these days. Maybe they 'tocked' when they should have 'ticked'

They needed Abu Dhabi almost at any price. Not necessarily for today but 12 months down the road. If I remember correctly (which is always a stretch-lol) in order to qualify for the Malta incentives they have to break ground by this summer (June? July?)

Abu Dhabi gives them extended working capital over 2008 into 2009. It 'appears' they may be able to generate cash from operations this year. Wouldn't that be a hoot ??

Viditor would be the guy to know but I think 2012 is the 'drop dead' year on their debt. They are paying around 5.75% on it and if they can't knock it down (at least by half?) and then refinance they are screwed.

'Conceivably' AMD could be a $9bil/yr company by 2012. Carrying $2-$3bil of debt in 2012 would be as positive as AMD has been in a long time historically (hysterically?).

As far as IBM is concerned I could see a 'partnership' in Malta - little more than that -just to offset the overall Fab cost ($4 or $5 billion ?? I don't know ...)

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
'Conceivably' AMD could be a $9bil/yr company by 2012. Carrying $2-$3bil of debt in 2012 would be as positive as AMD has been in a long time historically (hysterically?).

Does this assume flawless execution on AMD's part, complete managerial meltdowns on Nvidia's and Intel's part, or all of the above?

I don't see AMD doing anything magical to dig themselves out at this stage, this situation is VERY reminescent of the K6 days when the company was betting the farm on K7 and the Dresden fab.

The difference back then was K7 and Dresden fab made the difference, there is nothing "waiting in the wings" to salvage the situation this time around. Phenom hit with a resounding thud, and the NY fab hasn't gone any further than lip-talk.

This time around I don't see any magical upsets in their future. I see lots of wishful thinking, but I place a lot of faith in the markets and the markets say AMD is worth about $8/share with their ever-so-rosy future already priced in (as that is what markets do, pricing in expected future results).

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Idontcare .....
This time around I don't see any magical upsets in their future. I see lots of wishful thinking, but I place a lot of faith in the markets and the markets say AMD is worth about $8/share with their ever-so-rosy future already priced in (as that is what markets do, pricing in expected future results).

Objectively I think this is an (*almost) normal cycle in the roller coaster of AMD's life. They've never really made money and they are pretty much back to where they were in '02.

Yup. Phenom hit with a thud but I think they will make it work (most likely not at a super-competitive level). I guess it depends on how they 'build' on it with the shrink to 45nm. Otherwise, the chipset / graphics / other seems to be positive.

Miss Rosey Senario would be if they fixed 'Core2' on the Phenoms, repaired the whole L3/1.8GHz monster and created an overclocking gem out of it.

If that's the case maybe Viditor @ $30 pps wouldn't be wrong

 

[Idontcare]

Back then AMD made a couple process technology moves that proved advantageous in the forthcoming K8 years.

They adopted copper interconnects at the 180nm node, the first to do so followed only by TI at the same node while the rest of the industry stayed on Al interconnects at the 180nm node (including Intel).

They migrated to SOI. This really helped AMD do well at controlling the thermal profiles of their CPUs for years.

Now zoom forward to current time. Both Cu and SOI were not unknown magical process technologies that AMD rolled out and surprised everyone with, that has never happened with AMD. What AMD did was accelerate their internal timelines for introducing these industry-wide under-development technologies into production.

Any one could have done this, but doing so comes at an expense of poor yields and debugging immature equipment. Intel decided not to pursue introducing Cu at 180nm node, it wasn't because they couldn't but because they made a financial decision not to. A calculated risk. AMD took that risk and concluded differently, and the results were to their advantage.

The same with SOI. AMD didn't invent it, and Intel wasn't unaware of it. But AMD moved on it, at an expense, and it turned out beneficial to them.

My point here is that there isn't anything lying around now like this anymore. All the low-hanging fruit has been used. It would be different if it were AMD who was releasing HK/MG xtors at 45nm while Intel stuck with standard NiSi/SiON/Si xtors at 45nm. But the shoe is now reversed, Intel is the one pushing the more advanced process technologies here while AMD is behind the curve (timeline wise).

I don't see this being a standard cycle, the barrier to entry for developing each successive technology node has outstripped AMD's modest R&D budgets whereas Intel can quite easily develop many more nodes at their leisure with their 4X larger budgets.

Its a simple numbers game, which if the node-on-node costs were merely linear then it would be one thing, but these non-linear development costs are quickly thinning the herd.

IBM is in the same pickle too with their Power6+ and Power7 ambitions. The fab club mentality will carry them forward maybe 3 more nodes, then what?

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman
How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

Mark to market is a bitch, you can bet Abu Dhabi offered exactly the PPS they did for all the right reasons, and AMD accepted the PPS from Abu Dhabi for all the right reasons as well.

Emotion does not make for a valid mark-to-market valuation. Ask Yahoo's board of directors about this in 365 days.

I pretty sure all that that means something, but you lost me at the first sentence. It appears as though you're repudiating my comments, easy to do given my limited knowledge of the market, but not very educational for me. Would mind translating that into something a contractor might understand?

Quite the opposite actually, I was adding more fuel to the fire of questioning Viditor's logic that current AMD shareholders would hold-out for $30/share (price per share = PPS).

My point was Abu Dhabi was willing to only pay about $12.25/share, and AMD's board of directors (BOD) took the offer. Abu Dhabi would have invested a lot of money into very smart financial folks who in turn had access to all manner of internal financial documents at AMD that non of us common folk have access to...and when they boild that all down they concluded the company was worth $12.25/share.

And then AMD's BOD looked at their books, their future product lineups, and the arguments that Abu Dhabi's folks made to justify their $12.25/share offer...and the BOD concluded YES we will take it!

So is $30/share a rational PPS? The existing data from near recent market activity says no, no its not. If it were then AMD's BOD would have held out for more, and Abu Dhabi would have offered more than the $12 they offered.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21840227/

Thank you.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Greenman
How long ago did you buy in? And why on earth would any company offer 30$ a share for AMD?

I like AMD, but it appears that the A64 was the result of buying Nex-Gen (that's simply an opinion, I have no real information). I don't see AMD doing anything but giving Hector more money and sinking further into obscurity. Not many people are in a hurry to board a sinking ship.

Mark to market is a bitch, you can bet Abu Dhabi offered exactly the PPS they did for all the right reasons, and AMD accepted the PPS from Abu Dhabi for all the right reasons as well.

Emotion does not make for a valid mark-to-market valuation. Ask Yahoo's board of directors about this in 365 days.

I pretty sure all that that means something, but you lost me at the first sentence. It appears as though you're repudiating my comments, easy to do given my limited knowledge of the market, but not very educational for me. Would mind translating that into something a contractor might understand?

Quite the opposite actually, I was adding more fuel to the fire of questioning Viditor's logic that current AMD shareholders would hold-out for $30/share (price per share = PPS).

My point was Abu Dhabi was willing to only pay about $12.25/share, and AMD's board of directors (BOD) took the offer. Abu Dhabi would have invested a lot of money into very smart financial folks who in turn had access to all manner of internal financial documents at AMD that non of us common folk have access to...and when they boild that all down they concluded the company was worth $12.25/share.

And then AMD's BOD looked at their books, their future product lineups, and the arguments that Abu Dhabi's folks made to justify their $12.25/share offer...and the BOD concluded YES we will take it!

So is $30/share a rational PPS? The existing data from near recent market activity says no, no its not. If it were then AMD's BOD would have held out for more, and Abu Dhabi would have offered more than the $12 they offered.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21840227/

As a former editor, I can assure you that the saying "timing is everything" rings true for many areas.
Things to keep in mind are:

1. a decision to sell the company won't be made by the BOD, it will be made directly by the shareholders.
2. The Abu Dhabi deal occured only after it was found that there was a problem in the Phenom rollout...in other words when AMD needed cash immediately.
3. With ASPs, GM, and Marketshare all increasing, I don't see any near term cash problems for AMD (which would be the ONLY reason to sell now at these prices). In fact, this last quarter they came within a hair of breakeven...
4. While I agree that near term market activity says the pricing is much lower than $30, I have never ever seen a company sold based only on near-term numbers (unless they were about to go under, which obviously AMD is not). For example, during the RJR/Nabisco deal, the price for the starting bid was based on the all-time high. That's a fairly common starting place...
5. In April 09, the anti-trust case goes to court...even as a pure crap-shoot (and almost everyone thinks the odds are well into AMD's favour), the potential of a $4-30 Billion award or settlement drives the value of the shares well into the $30 range. $5 Billion would make AMD completely debt free and would pay off all of their Fabs as well...

 

[Idontcare]

[Please don't take this dialogue as your typical anti-AMD schtik. This is quite educational and I enjoy the conversation.]

Originally posted by: Viditor
1. a decision to sell the company won't be made by the BOD, it will be made directly by the shareholders.

I freely admit that my education on the AMD/Abu Dhabi deal came by way of media snippets and sound-bites on MSNBC Squawk Box. I was under the impression that the BOD constructed the dilution deal without the shareholders knowledge, and when it was announced there wasn't a vote by the shareholders but more of an "executive decision" made by the BOD to take the money.

Is this perception of the Abu Dhabi deal in grave error? What was the deal then. With the scenario laid out above I cannot rationalize why the BOD cannot continue to treat the shareholders as they have thus far. Wasn't there a rather nasty Q4/06 analyst meeting afterwhich AMD showed their hand in Q1/07 and devastated the folks who bankrolled the ATI acquisition?

My point here is that AMD's BOD has certainly been portrayed by mainstream financial media as rolling over the top of the shareholders for many quarters now, so what substantiates the faith at this point that such behavior is suddenly going to stop going forward?

Originally posted by: Viditor
3. With ASPs, GM, and Marketshare all increasing, I don't see any near term cash problems for AMD (which would be the ONLY reason to sell now at these prices). In fact, this last quarter they came within a hair of breakeven...

It was quite encouraging. The enthusiast in me has no problem accepting that somewhere out there is a balance for AMD to make money dominating the high-volume lower-end market segments. The proof is that Via is doing this with C7.

The personal issue I have is that knowing the process node technology as intimately as I do, I just don't see a viable path for AMD to return to the glory days of K8 vs. Prescot. THe IBM fab club is clearly the only option for AMD to get to 32nm node, but just look at the severly lagging timeline for 45nm and consider the quality of the node (no MG) and the question of 32nm just makes me pale with concern for my AMD engineer friends.

Originally posted by: Viditor
4. While I agree that near term market activity says the pricing is much lower than $30, I have never ever seen a company sold based only on near-term numbers (unless they were about to go under, which obviously AMD is not). For example, during the RJR/Nabisco deal, the price for the starting bid was based on the all-time high. That's a fairly common starting place...

Sure, but reaching for the extreme case of the world's absolute best-case scenario in historical buy-out deals is not exactly building a substantive case for the valuation of AMD. There is nothing special about AMD, so I would expect nothing better than your average 1.5X current stock price multipier on a buy-out bid. In fact it is not good for AMD's buy-out potential that there is question marks over x86 license rights transfer and the fact their market segment has an 800lb gorilla in it.

Originally posted by: Viditor
5. In April 09, the anti-trust case goes to court...even as a pure crap-shoot (and almost everyone thinks the odds are well into AMD's favour), the potential of a $4-30 Billion award or settlement drives the value of the shares well into the $30 range. $5 Billion would make AMD completely debt free and would pay off all of their Fabs as well...

Trust me I have been waiting for this since the days of original K7 Athlon trying to break into Intel-only suppliers.

BUT I must admit I am becomming deeply troubled by the more and more "SCO like" attitude that seems to be replacing the AMD business "make money selling chips" and becoming "our lawyers and pending litigation will save the day". SCO has been telling investors this line for years, and it did not go well for them.

This lawsuit deal is kinda of like the same effect that the allure of lotteries have on the poor. They get all pie-in-the-sky dreamy about what they are gonna do with their lottery winnings and proceed to spend $5 on lottery tickets instead of spending the money on something that helps them out of their plight (like a dental plan). (I am speaking from a LOT of experience here)

AMD is drunk with hope if their business plan going forward is factoring in even 1% of the "hoped for" gains from the settlement. Focus on making money the old-fashioned way.

 

[Acanthus]

See sig idontcare

 

[lopri]

Shareholders or BOD's attitude/hope towards the lawsuit has nothing to do with the lawsuit's outcome, doesn't it

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: lopri
Shareholders or BOD's attitude/hope towards the lawsuit has nothing to do with the lawsuit's outcome, doesn't it

I continue to hold out that the markets have already priced in any reasonable expectations of AMD's outcome on the lawsuit.

The only reason the current AMD stockprice would move is if the lawsuit doesn't pan out as currently expected.

Market's price in expectations of future results, and stock prices change valuation solely based on changes in future epectations.

The only reason present day results modulate stock prices is because present day results change the liklihood of the pre-existing priced-in expectations of future results.

When Intel announces that the past quarter came in 1 penny under expectation, the stock will fall NOT because of that 1 penny under analyst consensus but because of the knock-on effect of what last business quarter means for the NEXT four quarters.

I don't make this up, I am series 3 certified and I do this for a living. But I do enjoy debating what makes up the market's current expectations for the future results, as it is material when changes in future expectations occur.

If the market is already pricing in expectation of AMD's success in the Intel lawsuit, then there be cheap stock ahead should they fail to win that lawsuit. And vice versa if they aren't expected to win but they do. It's good to talk about these things, they are material.

 

[v8envy]

Another possibility is winning the lawsuit but not receiving anywhere near 4-30 billion dollars. Even if Intel's anti-competitive practices are found to have damaged AMD the amount of damages awarded may not be so astronomical.

AMD couldn't satisfy demand with their capacity during the days of Intel playing foul. It should be very easy to demonstrate this -- the etail/retail channel became absolutely starved for inventory as soon as Dell started selling AMD machines. AMD sold every chip they made during those days, it'll be interesting to show how they'd have made more money selling the same chips for less to Dell.

As far as competing with Via in the extreme budget segment -- I don't think there's room there for two players. Which may be bad news for Via, to be sure. In addition, when you're doing the razor thin margin high volume game there's no need for a highly compensated executive team. I don't think AMD can return to its old niche as a value player any more.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
See sig idontcare

Would you agree that he does a far better job making AMD specific information available than AMD does?

I find Viditor's posts far more substance bearing and educational than anything Hector's leadership team are leaving in their wake.

I have yet to converse with a forum goer that could hold a candle to the pure PR BS that Henri Richard was spinning before suddenly making a completely unrelated (so we are told) career change.

Now THERE was an Iraqi Misinformation Minister. He missed his calling, he could have made a killing selling 5/1 ARM loans to the subprime markets.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: v8envy
Another possibility is winning the lawsuit but not receiving anywhere near 4-30 billion dollars. Even if Intel's anti-competitive practices are found to have damaged AMD the amount of damages awarded may not be so astronomical.

AMD couldn't satisfy demand with their capacity during the days of Intel playing foul. It should be very easy to demonstrate this -- the etail/retail channel became absolutely starved for inventory as soon as Dell started selling AMD machines. AMD sold every chip they made during those days, it'll be interesting to show how they'd have made more money selling the same chips for less to Dell.

As far as competing with Via in the extreme budget segment -- I don't think there's room there for two players. Which may be bad news for Via, to be sure. In addition, when you're doing the razor thin margin high volume game there's no need for a highly compensated executive team. I don't think AMD can return to its old niche as a value player any more.

I would suspect that AMD is less interested in a big cash settlement than some type of validation from the courts concerning business practices and their competition with Intel. Regardless, lawyers will be arguing for years with appeals and any final resolution is many, many moons from now ....

No doubt AMD must continue to refine its 'niche'. I imagine they understand that simple reasoning - and it's obvious they want a highly competitve product on the business desktop.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Acanthus
See sig idontcare

Would you agree that he does a far better job making AMD specific information available than AMD does?

I find Viditor's posts far more substance bearing and educational than anything Hector's leadership team are leaving in their wake.

I have yet to converse with a forum goer that could hold a candle to the pure PR BS that Henri Richard was spinning before suddenly making a completely unrelated (so we are told) career change.

Now THERE was an Iraqi Misinformation Minister. He missed his calling, he could have made a killing selling 5/1 ARM loans to the subprime markets.

Sadly it is true, viditors information, although usually severely optimistic is at least in some ways accurate an plausible.

 

[v8envy]

I still love the quote from Hector to the effect of "I don't understand how the company can be worth 50% less now than a few weeks ago." This is a CEO, ladies and gentlemen. Making statements that leave any serious investor staring with with open-jawed wonderment.

For those of you still watching, Idontknow explained how -- companies are valued according to projected future performance. Give an indication that your future may not be as rosy as previously believed and you can get a 50% valuation haircut in short order. The CEO's job is to increase shareholder equity. Any CEO that doesn't understand basic markets (or simply makes statements implying he's got no clue) is going to make investors very, very nervous.

Sure, AMD may win big in the Intel suit and drive the stock price up quite a bit. But as heyheybooboo pointed out, appeals etc will drag on for years. By the time the case is settled it'll be ancient history. And damages awarded may not be all that epic.

If AMD's board of directors was desperate enough to take $12ish/share a bit ago who's to say they won't be desperate enough to take less in the future? If they dillute the shareholders by accepting let's say $7/share for another cash infusion you can bet the market price will follow.

There is still little sign of a fixed Phenom and yet Intel is ready to flood the market with 45nm CPUs. AMD was forced to cut video card prices in reaction to NV's new mainstream offerings. These are not things which bode well for the near future. About the only thing worse would be Intel discontinuing the E2XXX series and moving the E4XXX series down to the $70 pricepoint.