Originally posted by: Some1ne
If [Intel] is going to meet it's 1 million quota it has to be either pumping E6600 and E6700 out by the hundreds if not thousands a day or they are having trouble producing them and we may not see decent stock for months. We should know my Monday what the story is (bad distribution or bad production).
You know, I've been wondering, where are the anandtech columnists and other tech writers in all this? Aren't they supposed to speak up and cry "foul" and "paper launch" and "price gouging" when things like this Core 2 Duo fiasco happen? I know it's only been a couple days since the embargo passed, but it's pretty clear that there is no real availability of the E6600+ retail chips, and I don't understand why nobody is calling Intel on this yet, or pointing out the enormous discrepency between actual price and MSRP that the shortage of product is creating. Just as guilty as Intel for announcing a launch without having any product to supply, and just as guilty as retailers who price-gouge because they can, are the people who are supposed to serve as watch-dogs, and point out that Intel has declared "launch" without actually launching the products it was supposed to (in sufficient quantities to ensure a stable supply), and that retailers are taking advantage of the situation and trying to sell chips for sometimes close to twice what they're supposedly worth, and to analyze the impact on the playing field as a whole, and posit vague conspiracy theories and so on. Their absence in all this is rather conspicuous, and even worthy of contempt, so as long as they're not around, I'll posit my own vague conspiracy theory...given that we know that:
1. Intel declared availability/launch of the Core 2 Duo on July 27th. Supposedly this is when chips would have started shipping to retailers, OEM's, and the like.
2. Intel also had an embargo on selling/shipping the retail varaints of the chips until August 7th. Note that from a launch perspective this is meaningless (and if anything, should have made the perceived launch go smoother), as the 27th is when the chips (supposedly) started shipping.
3. We are now two days into the launch, and retail version of the E6600+ chips are virtually nonexistent (and estimates on availability push back all the way to mid/late August, depending upon who you choose to ask/believe), and while it appears that Intel did a satisfactory job of supplying the E6300 and E6400 chips in volume, the shortage of the higher-end models is driving up prices across the board.
4. The MSRP's on all of the Core 2 Duo chips are seductively low given the performance they offer, but due to the screwed up supply, nobody is getting any Core 2 chip for anywhere even close to the MSRP.
5. Hardware review sites saw no shortage of (potentially hand-picked) E6600 and higher chips even weeks before the launch date, giving plenty of time for the positive reviews to become widely disseminated, and for everyone to look at them and say "damn, I want one of those, it overclocks to 4.0 GHz".
...so, I think it's safe to declare the Core 2 Duo E6600 and higher models to be a paper launch, given that Intel had a full week and a half between the launch date and the embargo date to get product out to retailers, and they seem to have failed utterly, and may not even have product out in volume until the end of the month. While the chips all have extremely attractive "suggested" prices, the extreme shortage means that actual prices aren't going to reflect the suggested prices for quite some time yet, unless a handful of retail outlets decide to play nice to the consumers, which may happen, but it won't be the majority case. Obviously this is going to screw over and piss off most consumers, but there's another entity that's been screwed over worse...AMD. Think about it, AMD implemented some very aggressive price cuts across its entire product line right before the launch of Core 2, due to the fact that all of those reviews pouring in from the review sites supplied with those early Core 2 samples clearly showed that AMD could no longer come close to holding onto the performance crown. Hell, AMD even revised it's initially planned price-cuts and made them more severe in the wake of Intel's announced MSRP's and promises that they would have no problem supplying the channel with Core 2 chips. What's even more damning is that the entire time Intel was giving every indication that there would be no supply issues, but given that even with the week and a half grace period provided by the embargo Intel still couldn't deliver more than a pathetic trickle of the E6600+ models, I think it's safe to say that Intel never had a chance of delivering an adequate supply, and moreover a shortage of this magnitude cannot possibly be of any surprise to the company. In short what this means is that Intel must have deliberately overstated its ability to deliver its product on time...but why? Those AMD price cuts...the stronger Intel could make itself appear, the more severely AMD would have to cut its prices to keep itself looking competitive, and this is exactly what the extremely attractive MSRP prices and promises of an adequate supply accomplished, an escalation of the AMD price cuts. So lo and behold, while Intel's launch is decidedly paper, AMD's pricecuts are however in full effect, and it's too late for AMD to roll anything back now (but hey, at least no-one can dispute that with the elevated Core 2 prices AMD still holds the price/performance crown). Had there been evidence that Intel would not be able to actually deliver the product at launch, and/or that the Core 2 chips would sell significantly above MSRP, AMD could have reigned in its price cuts more, and/or pushed them back to a later date.
So there it is, I posit that Intel artificially drummed up interest and hype and demand by shipping out hand-picked product for review very early, and deliberately misrepresented supply and/or named unrealistically low pricing information to further drive up demand, all in an effort to slash away at AMD's revenue/profits by goading AMD into the aggressive price-cuts, which otherwise would not have happened had Intel let on that it could not deliver an adequate supply of the new processors for the optimistic pricing to be realized. Kind of low, actually...though I'll still be buying a Core 2 if I can ever find one at something reasonably close to those overly optimistic suggested prices.
And that's my vague conspiracy theory...now tech columnists, please wake the hell up and do your damn jobs and expose the paper launch and price gouging for what it is.