Intel jealous of Abu Dhabi backing AMD - creates "Invest in America Alliance"

[saaya]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/d...Companies.html

its a double project
1: invest money in american companies (intel and its partners of course, it goes without saying that amd, nvidia and samsung arent part of this... )
2:pledge to hire american graduates (making sure there is a constant demand for top students)

1 is backed by:

Advanced Technology Ventures, Braemar Energy Ventures, Bridgescale Partners, Canaan Partners, DCM, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, Flywheel Ventures, Good Energies, Institutional Venture Partners, Investcorp Technology Partners, Khosla Ventures, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Menlo Ventures, Mohr Davidow Ventures, New Enterprise Associates, North Bridge Venture Partners, QuestMark Partners, Sevin Rosen Funds, Storm Ventures, Telesoft Partners, Updata Partners, U.S. Venture Partners, Venrock and Walden International.

2 is backed by:

Accenture, Adobe Systems, Autodesk, Broadcom Corp., CDW, Cisco, Dell, eBay, EMC Corp., General Electrinic, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Liberty Mutual Group, Marvell Semiconductor, Microsoft Corp., and Yahoo!.

interesting move... good for american students and employees
the fact that amd, nvidia and samsung, intels competitors, arent part of this shows that their no1 focus is definately intels own future and success, and this isnt an entirely patriotism inspired plan like they make it sound

[Hannibal Lecter]

AMD, nVidia and samsung Intel competitors ?

On paper yes. AMD and nVidia are not in the same league. As for Samsung they only really compete on flash memory and SoC (under licence), not sure it is such a big part of Samsung's business.

Before I get flamed about the AMD statement above, just think about the relative size of both companies and how weak AMD is. Then ask yourself how long AMD would survive a price war with Intel at this stage. Intel need AMD in the market and wont kill it.

As for AMD, nVidia and Samsung not participating I am not sure the companies that do participate have only intel's interest at heart. This is pure PR and regularly happens in time of bad economic periods. You're reading too much into this I think.

But you always like a little controversy, don't you

[FischOderAal]

and this isnt an entirely patriotism inspired plan like they make it sound

Patriotism works in the US of A. Calling someone "not a patriot" appears to be one of the worst offenses...

[saaya]

Intel need AMD in the market and wont kill it.

i dont think so... why does intel need amd?
long term, yes, its better for them to have a weak competitor that keeps them on their heels every now and then... but it doesnt have to be amd...

right now their biggest competitors are arm, samsung and nvidia...
i dont think anything would change for intel if amd went bankrupt...

[kl0012]

the fact that amd, nvidia and samsung, intels competitors, arent part of this shows that their no1 focus is definately intels own future and success, and this isnt an entirely patriotism inspired plan like they make it sound

Since when Samsung is an american company?

[Hannibal Lecter]

The scrutiny over Intel's business would dramatically increase and there is no chance whatsoever of a new competitor in x86 CPUs. It would just be too expensive to compete from scratch with Intel.

I agree that AMD is exactly where Intel want them : weak but relevant enough to look like a competitor.

Intel could have killed off AMD many times in the past 2 years, but they didn't why is that?

As for nVidia, I think they see more Intel as a future competitor (rightly so) than Intel see nVidia as a competitor/threat.

ARM is a great company and is certainly an annoyance to Intel's strategy. As for Samsung they have their fingers in so many pies, it's difficult to say whether they compete or collaborate (or both) with Intel.

Anyway as I said it is just a PR operation that's worked well in the past: in difficult times, patriotism always works!

[JF-AMD]

All of this is noise. If you look at anyone in the technology industry, you'll see 2 trends:

1. They have locations all around the world for R&D, manufacturing and operations. They invest all over the world. And over the past 5 years, I'd be willing to bet that American multinationals have done more growth outside the US than inside the US because there are more regions around the world with lower costs.

2. They sell their products around the world. If you paint yourself as a company tied to a particular country, you may endear yourself to some group of people in that country, but that does not help you in global markets. It could potentially hurt you.

I think if your company is trying to sell to the global market then you need to work globally and be inclusive. If your company wants to only sell to one region, then you need to focus on that region. As someone who spends a good amount of time outside of the US each quarter, dealing with partners, press and customers around the world, you see that they are more open to you when they know that you design products in 3-4 different countries, FAB them in 2 (and soon 3) countries, and do test assembly package and marking in yet another country.

It's a world economy, I'd personally rather think big and be inclusive than try to be exclusive to one country. I don't believe you do yourself any favors. I'd like to see what happens when folks from the "invest in america alliance" sit down with the governement of, say, Argentina or China to talk to them about buying their technology. Do they backpedal and say "yeah, that's just a PR thing to help us back home" or do they say "no, we really believe in this and that is why we don't want to invest our money with you."

Its amazing how in much of the world there is an advantage that you gain by having a local presence. This really just degrades that benefit.

My 2 cents only, I really don't speak for my company on this one.

[rozzyroz]

Im glad these companies are planning to hire more people and have chosen the US. I would assume that all of these countries are global, and this may be a PR move... but, jobs are jobs.

good jobs where employers treat thier employees good are becomming very hard to find in todays market.... im sure that goes for everywhere.

[wuttz]

Intel could have killed off AMD many times in the past 2 years, but they didn't why is that?

biggest piece of bs every spintel fsnboi keeps repeating. maybe to create an aura of insurmountable dominance?

its like saying i got hemorrhoids id like to keep...

[XS Janus]

OR... as many of those potential "investors" will rather have it: "Why don't you US students come work abroad to us... to I don't know, lets say... India. Why would we have to hire you there? So you can work in your country? Why?"
"As far as investments go we already invested as much as we want in your country, now it's time to invest some in our own backyard, sorry"

LOL. The thing is foreign investors will go for this and invest because they will be forced through God knows which background scheme, all for the cause of easing ever-growing US domestic issues and unrests.
Nice plan though.
Hope it will help to push trough the next few years...

[duploxxx]

The scrutiny over Intel's business would dramatically increase and there is no chance whatsoever of a new competitor in x86 CPUs. It would just be too expensive to compete from scratch with Intel.

I agree that AMD is exactly where Intel want them : weak but relevant enough to look like a competitor.

Intel could have killed off AMD many times in the past 2 years, but they didn't why is that?

As for nVidia, I think they see more Intel as a future competitor (rightly so) than Intel see nVidia as a competitor/threat.

ARM is a great company and is certainly an annoyance to Intel's strategy. As for Samsung they have their fingers in so many pies, it's difficult to say whether they compete or collaborate (or both) with Intel.

Anyway as I said it is just a PR operation that's worked well in the past: in difficult times, patriotism always works!

perhaps read the news papers a bit more why AMD wasn't bigger in the past and isn't these days.

When AMD had the cler technology lead between 2003-2006 they had to fight real hard to get recognition, they succeeded doing this in every way but this was mainly reduced by some other vendor that controlled all this in some financial ways.

However at this point in time, AMD doesn't have to get this recognition anymore, they are there at every place the must be (OEM-distribution-countries-fabrication-brand name). If this 2003-2006 would happen again I am sure Intel will be in a much worse shape then the previous period where they just lost upto 25% market share it will be 50-60% loss very fast.

[saaya]

Since when Samsung is an american company?

why does it have to be an american company?
can only american companies invest in america as a high tech location?

american companies are investing all over the world, why should other countries invest in america as well?

The scrutiny over Intel's business would dramatically increase and there is no chance whatsoever of a new competitor in x86 CPUs. It would just be too expensive to compete from scratch with Intel.

I agree that AMD is exactly where Intel want them : weak but relevant enough to look like a competitor.

Intel could have killed off AMD many times in the past 2 years, but they didn't why is that?

As for nVidia, I think they see more Intel as a future competitor (rightly so) than Intel see nVidia as a competitor/threat.

ARM is a great company and is certainly an annoyance to Intel's strategy. As for Samsung they have their fingers in so many pies, it's difficult to say whether they compete or collaborate (or both) with Intel.

Anyway as I said it is just a PR operation that's worked well in the past: in difficult times, patriotism always works!

yes, this is a good point...
its a pr move for sure, intel wants to get rid of its "guilty but not convicted of abusing a monopoly" vibe... and something like this cant exactly hurt in their case against the new york state attourney... they might be trying to make him look bad for suing a company that cares oh so much for the american people

[Hannibal Lecter]

biggest piece of bs every spintel fsnboi keeps repeating. maybe to create an aura of insurmountable dominance?

its like saying i got hemorrhoids id like to keep...

I knew someone would come out with this kind of intelligent post. Instead of calling me a fanboy which I am not, why don't you enlighten me and explain to me why this is BS?

Fanboyism is stupid and make no sense whatsoever. All these companies are after one and only one thing: what's in our wallets. Their only allegiance is to their shareholders and they will use every possible ways (ethical/legal or not) to get our money. That's why there are rules and laws. The sooner people understand that, the better. And by the way the irony is that those shareholders are many of us through mutual/pension funds and the likes!

So no, I am not a fanboy, but AMD is a very weak target whether you like it or not. Two years ago AMD+ATI market cap was about 1.5B (a quarter's worth of Intel's profits); they cannot fight a price war against Intel, do you really think that Intel doesn't know it?

There is no "aura of insurmountable" dominance there is only a company that committed financial suicide because of the complacency and the arrogance of its management, when they thought Intel could never catch up to them.

This is where we are. Do I like that situation? No I don't and nobody should. So instead of calling someone a fanboy, try to be a little more objective.

Peace

[Hannibal Lecter]

its a pr move for sure, intel wants to get rid of its "guilty but not convicted of abusing a monopoly" vibe... and something like this cant exactly hurt in their case against the new york state attourney... they might be trying to make him look bad for suing a company that cares oh so much for the american people

Exactly

[Serra]

Ah the old patriotism flag. It's funny how as the economy starts to turn around these companies would undoubtedly be increasing their investments - especially in start-ups - anyway, but now it's an American initiative. It's like getting paid for something you were going to do anyway, except by creating a group designed to invest together you can actually somewhat force success and increase your returns too.

Not that they're doing anything wrong. I'm sure they will be investing in American firms and will therefore hold true to their pledge, this is just capitalism at work.

As for AMD, Samsung, and nVIDIA not being part of the alliance... well, AMD doesn't have money to invest, Samsung isn't an American company, and nVIDIA... well, that's one that was legitimately left out.

biggest piece of bs every spintel fsnboi keeps repeating. maybe to create an aura of insurmountable dominance?

its like saying i got hemorrhoids id like to keep...

You're probably right. That company that nets billions of dollars a year couldn't possibly have crushed the opposition who holds a small minority of chip sales and who has lost hundreds of millions (if not billions) every year for the last number of years and who is not expected to see a turn around for a few years yet.

Put another way: Intel could have cut itsprofit in half to lower CPU prices to a point where they lose money on each of them and ensured AMD wouldn't be profitable for 50 years but didn't. They clearly could have won, but "winning" would have destroyed them in the following anti-trust litigation. Don't take it as a knock against AMD or their quality, it's a numbers game and Intel is a behemoth.

If this 2003-2006 would happen again I am sure Intel will be in a much worse shape then the previous period where they just lost upto 25% market share it will be 50-60% loss very fast.

Intel definitely didn't lose up to 25% of it's total market to AMD ever. Maybe one segment somewhere, but that would be it. AMD definitely couldn't take 50-60% of the market in even the next 10 years if it's processors were twice as fast as Intels starting in 2011 either, simply because they don't have the capacity to produce that many chips. Increasing production 10 fold when fabs take that long to build and are that expensive is not a simple task.

[Hannibal Lecter]

@Serra: excellent post

But I am sure you'll soon be called an Intel fanboy for saying what anyone mildly objective can clearly see.

[eric66]

actually amd have really strong gpu part which people seem to underestimate when fusion will arrive that will make huge difference imho

[Hannibal Lecter]

Fusion is the reason AMD bought ATI. It was the absolutely correct strategic decision but the absolutely wrong price. Worse, a price they couldn't afford.

But you're right soon the fusion type cpus will dominate the low to mid end market. It makes sense and AMD could be ahead of Intel on this.

Time will tell.

[Tech Dav]

Patriotism works in the US of A. Calling someone "not a patriot" appears to be one of the worst offenses...

Ironic thing is that Intel is one that invested billions into the jewish only state of Israel and I guess the jews are the ones to cloak themselves in pro America "patriotism" as long as Americans pay for it Intel also invested much more into some other Asian third world nations , as well as bring many of them to America

[Hannibal Lecter]

Ironic thing is that Intel is one that invested billions into the jewish only state of Israel and I guess the jews are the ones to cloak themselves in pro America "patriotism" as long as Americans pay for it Intel also invested much more into some other Asian third world nations , as well as bring many of them to America

1) Are you saying there are no American jews
2) The billions they may have invested in Israel gave them huge returns and put them ahead of AMD.

I am not sure I quite get what you try to imply

[saaya]

As for AMD, Samsung, and nVIDIA not being part of the alliance... well, AMD doesn't have money to invest, Samsung isn't an American company, and nVIDIA... well, that's one that was legitimately left out.

so you have to be american to support america?
amd might not have a lot of money, but abu dhabi? more than all of those investment outfits together i bet...
abu dhabi couldnt care less about amd or intel, they care about money... but intel seems to see them as picking a side, and picking their competitors side... thats probably why they didnt include them in this, and its an emotional decision... never good when your goal is to make money...
same for samsung and nvidia...

although samsung might have to do with it not being american, i can buy that... it would probably make some americans feel ackward about this programme if there are "sliteyes" involved in a patriotic masterplan to ensure americas top spot and dominance in the tech industry.

im not saying thats what intel thinks, im just saying im sure there are people who see it that way, especially conservative polititians who intel is most likely trying to impress with this programme...

[Hannibal Lecter]

What you are saying is correct but maybe those not participating were asked, but refused?

[Glow9]

Yeah and their R&D and plants are in Asia and Israel invest in America alright..... Bunch of .

so you have to be american to support america?
amd might not have a lot of money, but abu dhabi? more than all of those investment outfits together i bet...
abu dhabi couldnt care less about amd or intel, they care about money..

Yeah ironic isn't it considering most American companies could care less about their own people. Healthcare rates +39%, forclosures, hell my healthcare costs just went up 15% out of nowhere. Invest in America alright so some dic at the top can screw you later. At least AMD is setting up a new place in AZ.

Ironic thing is that Intel is one that invested billions into the jewish only state of Israel and I guess the jews are the ones to cloak themselves in pro America "patriotism" as long as Americans pay for it Intel also invested much more into some other Asian third world nations , as well as bring many of them to America

Totally true, a friend of mine brought back a bumper sticker from Israel, with a F16 on it and it said America We're with you! Something like that. I through it away though smelt like war crimes.

[wuttz]

long story short,

to "kill" amd intel will have to resort using illegal tactics.

i.e. dumping products for less than the cost to manufacture them.

anti-competitive? yes. but given intels history, thats just business as usual.

=)

[Hannibal Lecter]

@Glow9:
WOW!!!

Life seems so black and white to you! There are only good guys and bad guys, wolves and lambs. That sounds a little naive to me.

Intel plants and R&D in Israel and Asia don't have to invest in the US, why would they

But they brought huge returns to Intel didn't they?