Nvidia or IBM to acquire AMD ?

[Idontcare]

Man oh man you got that right!

AMD needs some serious private equity investment injection, not the kind that just buys shares on the open market (that is merely a wealth transfer amongst shareholders) but rather the kind that goes directly to AMD's bank account.

If only AMD could go entirely private equity like NXP and Freescale, then they could get off the radar long enough to really keep executive management's attention focused on the 4-year horizon instead of the next conference call meeting with stock analysts.

Does AMD lose their x86 license if they go private equity? It doesn't seem like that would invoke forfeiture of the licensing agreement (if private equity institutions simply became majority shareholder of AMD, without taking AMD off the public markets).

But I have no idea if this is even possible. I bet Viditor would know.

 

[sandorski]

If IBM were to buy AMD, I doubt they'd get back into the PC making Business. They could simply keep AMD as is, meaning as a Processor Design/Manufacturer for other PC Makers. IBM and AMD have had a close relationship for quite a long time now, each aiding the other especially regarding the Manufacture processes of CPUs. It would be a good fit.

 

[larciel]

Originally posted by: sandorski
If IBM were to buy AMD, I doubt they'd get back into the PC making Business. They could simply keep AMD as is, meaning as a Processor Design/Manufacturer for other PC Makers. IBM and AMD have had a close relationship for quite a long time now, each aiding the other especially regarding the Manufacture processes of CPUs. It would be a good fit.

Then we'd be back to days where paying $500-600 for mid-range CPU was normal.

I remember when I bought P2-350 for $170 back in, oh 98-99, next step up was P2 400 at $320 and P3 450 at $540. Right now, price diff between cpu models are mere $30-50 at most $120.

 

[Idontcare]

I think the lowest binned P!!! was 500Mhz, or at least I know the top bin P2 was 450MHz because I (naturally) has to waste way too much money and buy one when they came out. Dam thing would only overclock to 504MHz, the 300A celey's were such a better deal.

 

[Martimus]

What would make anyone think that IBM would want to get back into the x86 business after what happened with them with Cyrix?

 

[Idontcare]

IMO it always made much more sense for SUN and AMD to merge as SUN found K8's to fill out a product segment that their own ultrasparc did not and SUN (a fabless company) needs to get some access to fab tech in-house. Relying on TI to fab their chips was so not in their best interest.

But alas the x86 license issue eventually pretty much rules out all options for AMD.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Man oh man you got that right!

AMD needs some serious private equity investment injection, not the kind that just buys shares on the open market (that is merely a wealth transfer amongst shareholders) but rather the kind that goes directly to AMD's bank account.

If only AMD could go entirely private equity like NXP and Freescale, then they could get off the radar long enough to really keep executive management's attention focused on the 4-year horizon instead of the next conference call meeting with stock analysts.

Does AMD lose their x86 license if they go private equity? It doesn't seem like that would invoke forfeiture of the licensing agreement (if private equity institutions simply became majority shareholder of AMD, without taking AMD off the public markets).

But I have no idea if this is even possible. I bet Viditor would know.

AMD losing their x86 license is a double edged sword for Intel...
What happens if AMD is bought is that Intel has the right to end the cross-patent licensing agreement without predjudice.
However, there is no provision to allow Intel to use the AMD licensing if this happens. In essence, if Intel chooses to end the agreement due to a purchase of AMD, they will also cut their own throats because they would be unable to produce any of their own chips.
Just as it is with x86 for AMD, Intel uses so much AMD IP that it would be impossible to continue with any of their chips if they couldn't use it.

Edit: BTW, the only possibly viable AMD purchaser I can think of would be Samsung.
They have the money, synergy, marketing capacity, and experience...
IBM is not interested in expanding their microelectronics division (quite the opposite), and Nvidia is a laughable choice.

 

[Idontcare]

Samsung would make for an interesting twist indeed.

 

[nonameo]

How about 3D Realms?

 

[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.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: nonameo
How about 3D Realms?

Good lord please no, could you imagine how many years we'd be waiting then for the next gen processor to be released?

http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...m-forever-footage.html

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Man oh man you got that right!

AMD needs some serious private equity investment injection, not the kind that just buys shares on the open market (that is merely a wealth transfer amongst shareholders) but rather the kind that goes directly to AMD's bank account.

If only AMD could go entirely private equity like NXP and Freescale, then they could get off the radar long enough to really keep executive management's attention focused on the 4-year horizon instead of the next conference call meeting with stock analysts.

Does AMD lose their x86 license if they go private equity? It doesn't seem like that would invoke forfeiture of the licensing agreement (if private equity institutions simply became majority shareholder of AMD, without taking AMD off the public markets).

But I have no idea if this is even possible. I bet Viditor would know.

AMD losing their x86 license is a double edged sword for Intel...
What happens if AMD is bought is that Intel has the right to end the cross-patent licensing agreement without predjudice.
However, there is no provision to allow Intel to use the AMD licensing if this happens. In essence, if Intel chooses to end the agreement due to a purchase of AMD, they will also cut their own throats because they would be unable to produce any of their own chips.
Just as it is with x86 for AMD, Intel uses so much AMD IP that it would be impossible to continue with any of their chips if they couldn't use it.

Edit: BTW, the only possibly viable AMD purchaser I can think of would be Samsung.
They have the money, synergy, marketing capacity, and experience...
IBM is not interested in expanding their microelectronics division (quite the opposite), and Nvidia is a laughable choice.

I viditor I would like very much to see that in writing. Now your making Intel lawyers out to be idiots. Intel worded the contract not AMD they signed on the bottom line.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I viditor I would like very much to see that in writing. Now your making Intel lawyers out to be idiots. Intel worded the contract not AMD they signed on the bottom line.

I think you don't understand what a contract actually is Nemesis...
It is a meeting of the minds to the benefit of both parties.

Could you please show me what makes you think that only Intel worded the contract and that it wasn't a combined effort? If your theory is true, it will be the first time I can think of that this has ever happened in a case like this.

I think you're making AMD's lawyers out to be idiots...

 

[Nemesis 1]

Come on Viditor. Enough of the double talk. Give link . It is you who doesn't seem to understand give and take.

AMD got X86 from intel out of court. What did Intel get. As I said give link to the contract wording that you stipulate.

 

[Viditor]

Sigh...I think you are just being lazy here as this has been posted in at least 3 threads that you have been involved with...

Contract

Clause 6.2.b deals with acquisition...
(please note that 6.2.a deals only with a breach of contract such as AMD or Intel sharing IP with a 3rd party, and could result in AMD or Intel receiving all IP rights without reciprocating as defined in section 3.8)

BTW...the court didn't just gift AMD with x86, they recognised that AMD was entitled to it.
Intel has received many thousands of AMD patents. For a list,
look here.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Did you read this at all. 6.2.a

(a) A party may terminate the other party's rights and licenses
hereunder upon notice if the other party hereto commits a
material breach of this Agreement and does not correct such
breach within sixty (60) days after receiving written notice
complaining thereof. In the event of such termination, the
rights and licenses granted to the defaulting party shall
terminate, but the rights and licenses granted to the party
not in default shall survive such termination of this
Agreement subject to its continued compliance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Did you read this at all. 6.2.a

(a) A party may terminate the other party's rights and licenses
hereunder upon notice if the other party hereto commits a
material breach of this Agreement and does not correct such
breach within sixty (60) days after receiving written notice
complaining thereof. In the event of such termination, the
rights and licenses granted to the defaulting party shall
terminate, but the rights and licenses granted to the party
not in default shall survive such termination of this
Agreement subject to its continued compliance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement.

See...I knew you weren't going to even read my post...

As I said, 6.2.a deals with material breach, 6.2.b deals with all other reasons for termination.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Viditor
Sigh...I think you are just being lazy here as this has been posted in at least 3 threads that you have been involved with...

Contract

Clause 6.2.b deals with acquisition...
(please note that 6.2.a deals only with a breach of contract such as AMD or Intel sharing IP with a 3rd party, and could result in AMD or Intel receiving all IP rights without reciprocating as defined in section 3.8)

BTW...the court didn't just gift AMD with x86, they recognised that AMD was entitled to it.
Intel has received many thousands of AMD patents. For a list,
look here.

I bolded the part above i find abit confusing. This contract was an out of court contract.

I read your post I read 6.2.b .

So tell me Viditor how does 6.2.a relate to 6.2.b . Because there is a relationship therein.




What you would have us believe is if AMD goes bankrupt they can remove their patents on x86 from Intel and basicly ruin Intel . Is that what you would have us believe.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Here is 6.2. a and 6.2.b

No ware do I see anything that backs up your claim .


There must be a law student here . Maybe they could assist us.

(a) A party may terminate the other party's rights and licenses
hereunder upon notice if the other party hereto commits a
material breach of this Agreement and does not correct such
breach within sixty (60) days after receiving written notice
complaining thereof. In the event of such termination, the
rights and licenses granted to the defaulting party shall
terminate, but the rights and licenses granted to the party
not in default shall survive such termination of this
Agreement subject to its continued compliance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement.

(b) A party hereto may terminate this Agreement upon sixty (60)
days written notice of termination to the other party given at
any time upon or after:

(1) the filing by the other party of a petition in
bankruptcy or insolvency;

(2) any adjudication that the other party is bankrupt or
insolvent;

(3) the filing by the other party of any petition or answer
seeking reorganization, readjustment or arrangement of
its business under any law relating to bankruptcy or
insolvency;

(4) the appointment of a receiver for all or substantially
all of the property of the other party;

(5) the making by the other party of any assignment for the
benefit of creditors;

(6) the institution of any proceedings for the liquidation
or winding up of the other party's business or for the
termination of its corporate charter;

Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this exhibit. The
copy filed herewith omits the information subject to the confidentiality
request. Omissions are designated as *****. A complete version of this exhibit
has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Viditor
Sigh...I think you are just being lazy here as this has been posted in at least 3 threads that you have been involved with...

Contract

Clause 6.2.b deals with acquisition...
(please note that 6.2.a deals only with a breach of contract such as AMD or Intel sharing IP with a 3rd party, and could result in AMD or Intel receiving all IP rights without reciprocating as defined in section 3.8)

BTW...the court didn't just gift AMD with x86, they recognised that AMD was entitled to it.
Intel has received many thousands of AMD patents. For a list,
look here.

I bolded the part above i find abit confusing. This contract was an out of court contract.

What the heck is an "out of court contract"?
Please now show your proof that Intel decided on all of the wording for this contract...

I read your post I read 6.2.b .

So tell me Viditor how does 6.2.a relate to 6.2.b . Because their is a relationship therein.

They both deal with an end of the contract for cause.
6.2.a deals with a material breach of the contract, and 6.2.b deals with all other causes.

In 6.2.a, if either AMD or Intel perform a material breach of the contract, the injured party is entitled to all IP without the need to continue reciprocation.

In 6.2.b, there's a list of other causes for the ability of either party to end the contract immediately. In this case, since a breach of contract does not occur, then no penalty is assesed.

What you would have us believe is if AMD goes bankrupt they can remove their patents on x86 from Intel and basicly ruin Intel . Is that what you would have us believe.

No, if AMD goes bankrupt, those patents are considered assets of AMD and must be sold to the highest bidder to pay off the creditors.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Viditor come on now .

6.2.a deals with material breach of contract. 6.2.b. Covers the material breach of contract.

The wording in this claws clearly shows which lawyers wrote it. Intel laywers and intel figureing They wouldn't break the contract . And covering their butts if AMD went bankrupt.

Amd lawyers read it and said it was fair. Which it was. But AMD putting Intel out of business not likely. So it favored Intel big time.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Viditor come on now .

6.2.a deals with material breach of contract. 6.2.b. Covers the material breach of contract.

The wording in this claws clearly shows which lawyers wrote it. Intel laywers and intel figureing They wouldn't break the contract . And covering their butts if AMD went bankrupt.

Amd lawyers read it and said it was fair. Which it was. But AMD putting Intel out of business not likely. So it favored Intel big time.

You may believe in whichever God you choose Nemesis...

This is in black and white:

1. The header is "6.2. Termination for Cause"
2. There are 7 reasons of cause given in this section...material breach is listed ONLY in section 6.2.a, and the other 6 are listed ONLY in 6.2.b...material breach is NOT listed in 6.2.b and vice versa.

Your interpretation of legal wording is quite fun to read, but I don't see any correlation to reality there...I take it that you have no other source of information then?

Please go ahead and have the last word...this has gone on long enough.

 

[Idontcare]

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.

Digressing from the 6.2.a vs. 6.2.b conversation for a moment, what prevents AMD from doing the Abu Dhabi thing again and again selling "new" shares at whatever price they want to, all the while diluting the hell out of you honest and innocent shareholders?

That?s not a facetious question, seriously what prevents such "dilutions" from continuing? 8.1% was a pretty serious and first-order dilution, once a management tastes the easy cash I could see it become harder and harder to rationalize not going back for another hit.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

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.

Digressing from the 6.2.a vs. 6.2.b conversation for a moment, what prevents AMD from doing the Abu Dhabi thing again and again selling "new" shares at whatever price they want to, all the while diluting the hell out of you honest and innocent shareholders?

That?s not a facetious question, seriously what prevents such "dilutions" from continuing? 8.1% was a pretty serious and first-order dilution, once a management tastes the easy cash I could see it become harder and harder to rationalize not going back for another hit.

Technically, nothing really...
However you should keep in mind that the vast majority of AMD (62%) is held by institutions (Mutual Funds and Pension Groups), and they aren't easy to push around.
All of those dilutions must be pre-approved by shareholders before they're implemented...it's not something the board can do on it's own.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I tried to find the contract without all *****. There was one floating around at one time. I believe it was posted at XS. But I cann't recall the Title of the Topic. All **** kind of ruin the reading.


But a third party as I understood it can't own more than 20% of AMD stock. Its been a couple of years since I read it. So I could have that wrong. But its doubtful. But nothing can stop AMD from doing deals like you pointed out unless it exceeds 20%. After seeing what happened in that deal don't look for another 3rd party to make same mistake anytime soon. Besides AMD shareholders would revolt.

As far as mutual funds go .American funds growth is the largest mutual fund holder. 5.3%

Not to long ago they bought more AMD stock I freaked out. At that time I believe AMD was $18 share. Also it brought there holdings to just over 10% as i remember it. Since than the reduced holding to 5.3% at hugh loss to fund.

Oppenheimer was at 3% when above was at 10% now oppenheimer is at 4.6% . I believe it was American who put out a bunch of BS about AMD to prop up AMD prices.

I have filed a complaint with the DOW about this activity. and is currently being investagated. Somebody has to stop these false analyst reports.