Intel guilty in EU for manipulating the market against AMD?

[duploxxx]

Like who? IBM? No. Apple? No. Coca Cola? No. Siemens? No. Samsung? No. Who?

And AMD is only a CPU manufactor due to stolen technology and making clones.

what a nice post to start the day with, a good lauch is always welcome

Feeling a bit blue these days because there is some positive news and competition from AMD?

I would have to write page after page if all companies that did or do unethical business had to be included. You dont become big by being nice.

Also the OP is misleading (surprise). Its allegations, not being guildty in anything (yet).

the OP is correct, perhaps read it again, there is still a question mark behind the sentence.

perhaps also read the full article again, for the EU commission they are already found guilty, now it is just a matter of global approval.

Intel has been entangled in a dispute with EU antitrust regulators since 2001, following a complaint by rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. The Brussels-based European Commission accused Intel last July of giving computer sellers “substantial rebates” not to sell machines using AMD chips.

A final ruling may come in the next few weeks, the people said. The commission, the EU’s antitrust authority, allows national competition officials to review decisions before a final ruling is made.

“That’s speculative and we decline to comment,” said Chuck Mulloy, a spokesman for Santa Clara, California-based Intel.

Jonathan Todd, a commission spokesman, said “we have an ongoing antitrust investigation” and declined to comment further.

Fine Amount

EU antitrust officials will disclose the amount of the fine at a meeting with national regulators to discuss the draft decision. The fine must then be approved by the full commission.

[B.E.E.F.]

Even if Intel broke every law they are accused of, it isn't in the same league as any of the things you mentioned. There is such a thing as Statute of Limitations, look it up? Maybe Double Clueless can look it up as well

It happened in 2005. Do you know what the statute of limitations time limit is for a case like this?

No. Go sit in the corner and be quiet.

NO! Let's say Intel is fined X million US Dollars. They determine what they need to cover that, they raise prices by Y amount to cover said fine. Now let's just pick one out of many examples. One example: A $279 i920 prices is raised to $360 and Q9550 is set at about $335. X4 955BE would then increase from around $250 to $310. Anyone thinking AMD isn't going to follow Intel prices increases are setting themselves up to look silly!

Do you work for the Intel Finance department? Didn't think so. This is useless garbage.

Both Japan and Korea wanted Intel to change its business model and Intel did! Talking about squeezing companies for billions when Japan and Korea both collected less than 100 million combined should send up red flags! Hate for some large faceless company while cheering for another is almost a form of retardation!

This is not about cheering for your favourite company. This is about business practices. Intel broke the law. they tried to squeeze AMD's out with anti-competitive practices. Monopolies kill innovation and decent prices.

[Donnie27]

yes.

i don't think you understand modern business economics. the old model was cost + profit = price, but in todays highly competitive market that no longer applies. the new formula: profit = cost - price. the price remains constant and drops after prolonged market exposer. modern companies make money by reducing the cost to make the product (nvidia's simplified 9800gtx/gts250). the only market that does not act this way is raw materials (oil, milk, grain, lumber). intel would be foolish to increase prices in this economy, and it's not like no-one would notice the reason for the price hike. additionally, amd WOULD NOT increase prices to match intel's. if intel were to increase prices that would only increase demand for amd product. amd would maintain their current price structure and watch their market share rise because their products would be more competitive.

Look, if you think Intel will simply soak up millions in losses its you who don't quite understand anything about business & finances. There is no old or new formulas there's simple and plain business=P I don't need to work for AMD or Intel to know that! Your milk, grains and etc.. is called "Commodities" and if the fine is large enough, Intel will raise prices across the board. AMD would be stupid to not follow suite when they need higher margins. The EU's competition committee knows AMD can't recover at current price levels and this is a move to get prices raised for them.

Your kind of misstaken thinking is what had folks left in shock when A64 and then X2 showed what AMD really thought of consumers. They shocked their Fans who blindly loved them. Yes they'd follow Intel with higher prices and I don't blame, hell, I would too!

Korea = $25 mil, Japan = $50.

[Jowy Atreides]

My IQ dropped from reading this whole thread. Stop under-clocking my brain!

[Donnie27]

It happened in 2005. Do you know what the statute of limitations time limit is for a case like this?

No. Go sit in the corner and be quiet.

Do you work for the Intel Finance department? Didn't think so. This is useless garbage.

This is not about cheering for your favourite company. This is about business practices. Intel broke the law. they tried to squeeze AMD's out with anti-competitive practices. Monopolies kill innovation and decent prices.

All I'd said was that if they're found guilty, the costs will be passed on to the consumers as they ALWAYS are. Only one of AMD's complaints was brought in 2005, other started via proxy in Japan in 2002 and Korea in 2004. The statute of limitations was brought up about something else as well as your idiotic comparing Rape to Rebates LOL!

[DoubleZero]

I love this new concept

Companies should be above the Law, they should be allowed to do anything, because if they are fined, it's us, the consumers that will get hurt.

hey let them do everything that's ilegal, everything that gives them more money so things can be cheaper for us.

Maybe some little kid might think Intel isn't going to raise prices if pushed. Only someone who's been drinking thinks AMD isn't going to raise prices to levels just below Intel's now higher prices.

So can you then explain us all, why Intel don't raise the prices right now? Why Intel isn't making more money right now, because AMD would raised the prices also, guaranteed, so Intel would still be competitive. Try please so i can lmao again

We all know how Windows and Linux got more expensive after microsoft was fined.

So come Double Zero, point out the cluelessness instead of childishly off topic flame baiting yea mods, clean it up LOL!

Point out the cluelessness on your posts would be like a day job, and it's no worth it, since often your pals delete the posts.

[Aberration]

Ye and AM386 and AM486 wasnt clones and made by reverse engeering Intels tech? Good one. You are right, you did just reach your climax.

And the Pentium Pro, which everything since, was not based on stolen IP from Alpha? In which a court of law decided, in which Intel had to compensate and even hired some of their engineers as part of the settlement, in which the new arch for i7 came from......

Right

Neither side has done anything ethical in regards to design. But this topic is not about that, it is about one company having an inferior product and using its market position to keep its competitor down.

I wouldnt say that AMD would be as big as Intel is now, but they sure wouldnt be in the financial position that they have been. What Intel did was exactly what these laws are in place to prevent or punish.

[Final8ty]

People who think that Intel should be let off because of passing on the cost to the us are no better than judges taking bribes.

[Aberration]

Intel passing on the costs would be reducing the next price cut they plan by $1-2. I doubt it would be anything that a single consumer would notice because if it was they would start looking at the competition.

[Donnie27]

Intel passing on the costs would be reducing the next price cut they plan by $1-2. I doubt it would be anything that a single consumer would notice because if it was they would start looking at the competition.

I'm NOT saying Intel is innocent but there are folks here who seem to have more proof than AMD and their lawyers combined.

If you're talking about something like the $25 mil Korea fined Intel, or the 50 million Japan did, that's not the problem!

The Eurocrats have been chewing on the issue of Intel's anti-competiveness (or not?) since way back in 2001 when AMD first cried ‘Uncle' on the firm's arm twisting tactics. Intel, it said, was keeping AMD out of the market by offering "substantial rebates" to computer makers who didn't sell kit with AMD chips inside.

http://www.instantnews.net/intel-sla...no-tickle.aspx

"They are sitting on $14 billion in cash and generated close to $10 billion in cash last year ... any fine would be more a hit to the mind than a hit to the balance sheet," he said.

Dryden also said Intel would likely retain its more than 80 per cent share of the computer chip market, even if the EU places restrictions on its rebates which could make products more expensive for consumers.

You get a double whammy something that other guy can't seem to figure out. No more rebates means the first increase comes from the OEM and VARs as they add their usual market ups on now more expensive products. Intel will re-coup whatever the EU charges and that includes up to 10% of Intel's profits for a year!

I love this new concept

Companies should be above the Law, they should be allowed to do anything, because if they are fined, it's us, the consumers that will get hurt.

hey let them do everything that's ilegal, everything that gives them more money so things can be cheaper for us.


So can you then explain us all, why Intel don't raise the prices right now? Why Intel isn't making more money right now, because AMD would raised the prices also, guaranteed, so Intel would still be competitive. Try please so i can lmao again

We all know how Windows and Linux got more expensive after microsoft was fined.


Point out the cluelessness on your posts would be like a day job, and it's no worth it, since often your pals delete the posts.

The under lined part shows you don't pay attention too well. I just pointed how some of Intel prices are Flat when they should be going down. Others like the Q6600 are up (part not in short supply according two different VARs). But here we go again just another person with a personal grudge. Is that what keeps you from thinking clearly?

It's not an all day Job because you CAN'T LOL! It would absolutely absurd to try and prove costs aren't passed on to consumers and that costs minus rebates will not change prices for the worse. It only takes a few minutes to that point out.

Linux doesn't have the same market share size compared to Microsoft as AMD compared to Intel. Surely you can do better? That's not apples and oranges, that's Apples and Nuts Yet, par for the course for you

Dewd, competition is won by foundries and engineers, not marketing and or courts. Fans tell themselves such crap to feel better for some silly reason!
A64 and X2 works against AMD's claims when High Prices and being factory constrained hurt them more than Intel ever did. Not an Opinion, but a fact. Even while Conroe was pimp slapping them, Dell dried up their measly shipping volumes Yes, good old beloved AMD forsook their beloved Fans and Channel partners for that evil hated Dell. Dewd, stop hating

[marten_larsson]

Donnie27 is partly right and partly wrong IMO. Sure, Intel could pass the cost to the consumers but it would probably render a slight dip in sales if they did assuming the fine is a big one that would actually be noticeable to Intel (such as the Danish taxes of what, $500million?). If Intel was to raise the prices by lets say $15-20 on all CPUs, AMD probably would be able to sell a lot more chips which is probably what they would want to since that equals bigger market share, instead of raising prices.

[Bo_Fox]

Punish Intel by forcing Intel to give up the x86 license to the public so that Nvidia can use it!

ooooooooooooohhh!!! (evil laughter, with a pinkie in my mouth)

[Donnie27]

Donnie27 is partly right and partly wrong IMO. Sure, Intel could pass the cost to the consumers but it would probably render a slight dip in sales if they did assuming the fine is a big one that would actually be noticeable to Intel (such as the Danish taxes of what, $500million?). If Intel was to raise the prices by lets say $15-20 on all CPUs, AMD probably would be able to sell a lot more chips which is probably what they would want to since that equals bigger market share, instead of raising prices.

This is TRUE too!

I don't want to see higher prices from anyone! Look at how much complaining I've done about X58? Price increases MIGHT be tied to how large the Tax, erum Fine is Even if prices stayed the same and rebates are done away with, that still causes an increase in prices. Something else we ALL know, Intel shares marketing costs. Will that be the next complaint?

[lockee]

Low prices happen naturally in a free market, you don't need a cartel giving out illegal rebates. If Intel isn't fined and forced to obey the law they'll dominate the market (too late). They'll be able to force competition into bankruptcy by making them sell off fabs and other assets to raise capital (opps). Eventually there won't be any competition so the rebates will end, prices will skyrocket and people will AMD is out of business.

[Hornet331]

Low prices happen naturally in a free market, you don't need a cartel giving out illegal rebates. If Intel isn't fined and forced to obey the law they'll dominate the market (too late). They'll be able to force competition into bankruptcy by making them sell off fabs and other assets to raise capital (opps). Eventually there won't be any competition so the rebates will end, prices will skyrocket and people will AMD is out of business.

One mistake in your brilliant theorie... PCs (cpus) aren't are luxurious item any more, they are on the way (or better they are nearly there) to be a commodity...

[[XC] riptide]

Can we not all be friends?

[LightSpeed]

This is about business practices. Intel broke the law. they tried to squeeze AMD's out with anti-competitive practices. Monopolies kill innovation and decent prices.

QFT

Intel did something very wrong, and yet intel fanboys can still argue over that fact is just funny

And there were SO many countries where the law is not strict at all(especially with regard to anti-competitive practices by foreign firms), and intel capitalised on those majorly. In the south eastern parts of Asia, where a major IT revolution was/is taking place, intel did all that they could possibly do to sell the P4 by their silly anti-competitive practices

Sure, i applaud them for their technology and innovation, but shame on them for their shady practices, especially since AMD is less than half their size

[B.E.E.F.]

QFT

Intel did something very wrong, and yet intel fanboys can still argue over that fact is just funny

And there were SO many countries where the law is not strict at all(especially with regard to anti-competitive practices by foreign firms), and intel capitalised on those majorly. In the south eastern parts of Asia, where a major IT revolution was/is taking place, intel did all that they could possibly do to sell the P4 by their silly anti-competitive practices

Sure, i applaud them for their technology and innovation, but shame on them for their shady practices, especially since AMD is less than half their size

Again. Not about size. It's about competition.

When companies compete for dollars and performance, the consumer wins big time. The companies also win. A competitive company is a healthy and well functioning company. Free of corruption, inefficiencies.. etc. Not so with fat lazy monopolies.

[Donnie27]

One guy said it best, it is NOT just Black AMD and White Intel for or against either.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8215

According to a 2004 article in BusinessWeek, the European Commission began investigating Intel as early as 2001, although the initial probe was dropped. Things picked up again in 2004, which culminated in a raid of Intel’s European offices in 2005.

AMD hopes the charges filed will benefit consumers. "We are confident that this statement of objections will be a catalyst in opening the global microprocessor markets for the benefit of consumers and PC companies alike,” says AMD EMEA president Giuliano Meroni.

Silverman wouldn't say Monday whether AMD has petitioned the FTC but did acknowledge that the company had filed a complaint in 2000 in Europe. The company's lawsuit against Intel is scheduled to go to trial in a Delaware federal court in April 2009.

Paying off Judges?

According to a disclosure report filed with Congress, AMD paid a lobbying firm $200,000 in the first half of 2007 to lobby Congress, the White House, U.S. Trade Representative's office and Departments of Commerce and State on "antitrust issues in the semiconductor industry."

http://management.silicon.com/govern...9131454,00.htm

In the 48-page filing, which has an exasperated tone, AMD highlights its efforts - most of which it claims were rebuffed - to persuade major original equipment manufacturers to use its processors. For instance, when AMD offered HP, the biggest computer maker in the world, a million processors for free, HP took only 160,000, said AMD.

Excuse me, isn't that dumping? They say Intel sold processors under costs, how can you undercut free? Saying Intel forced HP to do anything when HP as been AMD's largest partner is pretty silly!

A very good read that tries to explain both side's issues and some history!

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...507442,00.html

The 2002 decision against Michelin also makes life tricky for Intel. The tire maker was found to have abused its market dominance by offering rebates and incentives to dealers that had the effect of excluding competitors. The comparisons to the Intel-AMD situation are striking because much of AMD's argument is built on the allegedly predatory impact of Intel's "market development" rebates to PC makers, also known as the Intel Inside program, which include payments to offset the cost of advertising. Intel responds that consumers have benefited from these rebates through lower prices.

When all is said and done, it is commie style legislated competition and it will increase to help AMD, just as it was when it first showed up in 2000, almost nine years ago.

http://www.crn.com/hardware/19360083...OSKHSCJUNN2JVN

By Steven Burke, ChannelWeb
9:00 AM EST Mon. Nov. 13, 2006
From the November 13, 2006 issue of CRN

One hallmark of any good channel program is fairness to all classes of partners from the smallest to the biggest. VARs are businesspeople. They understand that vendors have to do what's right for the business. But they also know when partnerships are just plain inequitable. That's the feeling of more than a few Advanced Micro Devices (NYSE:AMD) partners who are upset regarding a severe shortage of AMD Athlon 64 2X processors.

STEVEN BURKE
Can be reached at (781) 839-1221 or via e-mail at sburke@cmp.com.
What's curious about the AMD shortage is it comes in the wake of the chip maker's blockbuster deal to supply chips to longtime channel antagonist Dell (NSDQell). First off, it is system builders of all stripes that put AMD on the market-share map. These trusted partners saw the performance gains that could be had with the AMD processors, took them and ran with them. Dell, meanwhile, stuck its head in the sand. If you can't supply your current longtime loyal customers, why would you take on a large contract with a channel killer like Dell and then put the screws to the partners that were backing you?

AMD has acknowledged the shortage but has failed to address head-on the system builder fury. What we plainly have here is a failure to communicate that is all too common when it comes to vendors grappling with product shortages or channel policies that rub partners the wrong way.

Not just something Donnie27 and others are making up! I can back up every frakkin' thing I've said! Or they can believe Hector as he'd said their market share would be larger. If AMD had the volume they could have gained up to about 35% of the market, only to see the Merom based notebook and Conroes hand them their @$$! Then end up right back At about 13%. Just as Intel didn't have to pay off Apple to go Intel.

Last but not least, all of Intel's rebates, promotions and etc was posted and NO secrete.

http://www.intel.com/cd/channel/rese...eng/306999.htm

New This Week!
* Intel® High Performance SSD promotion. Valid 4/26/09-6/20/09
* All Cores are NOT Created Equal Promotion! Valid: 4/19/09 - 7/18/09
* Think Big... Go Small Promotion! Valid: 4/19/09 - 7/18/09
* Instant Rebate on Intel® Q8400 Core™ 2 Quad processor Box: Valid 4/19/09-7/19/09 or while supplies last
Ending Soon!
* Intel® Core™ i7 processor plus an Intel® High-Performance Solid-State Drive (SSD) Promotion Valid: 1/25/09–4/25/09

If I worked for one of the SSD makers I'd get in some of the Tort LOL!

[Shadowmage]

I don't think you know what lobbying firms are. That has nothing to do with "paying off judges".

[570091D]

Look, if you think Intel will simply soak up millions in losses its you who don't quite understand anything about business & finances.

actually, i work for a multi-billion dollar multi-national buerocracy, so i do understand international business on a large scale. and if intel is SO opposed to taking losses, why didn't they incease thier prices to cover the 90% profit loss they took in Q4?

http://albany.bizjournals.com/albany...2/daily72.html

There is no old or new formulas there's simple and plain business=P

so businesses today are run the same way they were in 1800? there is NO-ONE in the world willing to look at thier business model and make some adjustments? there is no business evolution? please, tell this to toyota and come on back with their response.

I don't need to work for AMD or Intel to know that! Your milk, grains and etc.. is called "Commodities"

my milk and grains? where!?! i've been looking all over for those! actually processors, memory, toasters, televisions; these are considered commodities.

AMD would be stupid to not follow suite when they need higher margins. The EU's competition committee knows AMD can't recover at current price levels and this is a move to get prices raised for them.

AH-HA!!! so the conspiracy has been revealed! this is all a plot to undo intel and raise amd to their rightful place as market leader! very clever of you to figure it out.

Donnie27 is partly right and partly wrong IMO. Sure, Intel could pass the cost to the consumers but it would probably render a slight dip in sales if they did assuming the fine is a big one that would actually be noticeable to Intel (such as the Danish taxes of what, $500million?). If Intel was to raise the prices by lets say $15-20 on all CPUs, AMD probably would be able to sell a lot more chips which is probably what they would want to since that equals bigger market share, instead of raising prices.

This is TRUE too!

so now amd would not raise prices because intel will? which is it?

The under lined part shows you don't pay attention too well. I just pointed how some of Intel prices are Flat when they should be going down. Others like the Q6600 are up (part not in short supply according two different VARs).

when did the q6600 price go up? also, i7 and x58 parts will not see a price reduction for some time (when volume starts to pick up). and i think this is the part you don't understand: prices are lowered on products that sell very well. the more of a certian product you sell, the less it costs you to make it. the concept is called "eceonomies of scale." and that is why intel WILL NOT raise prices because of the fine. if they raise prices (aside form bolstering amd's sales) they will reduce their sales making it more expensive to make the products. then they'd have to raise prices again. then even fewer people would buy their products.... and so the cycle of self-destruction goes. intel is aware of this process and will make business adjustments to avoid it. if this fine results in anything at intel, it will be layoffs. because profit = cost - price.

[Calmatory]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasia

Eurasia is a large landmass covering about 53,990,000 km² or about 10.6% of the Earth's surface (36.2% of the land area). Often considered a single continent, Eurasia comprises the traditional continents of Europe and Asia (and Eurasia is a portmanteau of the two).

Just depends on who you talk to.

Either way, this is the wrong time to be trying to squeeze large corporations for Back Door tax increases This does NOTHING but drives up costs for the EU consumers because Intel will simply pass on any fine/s to folks buying their products. Unlike the EU, the Koreans aren't stupid enough to try and pull something like that, hince 25 million dollar fine, Intel does away with rebates there. Yes, it will help AMD as well as they'll finally be able to do in courts, something they couldn't do in the Boardroom, raise prices and or get higher ASP's

Meanwhile, the same old scam of rebate companies ripping off Consumers while paying off not only the US, but the EU as well, will continue Yes, rebate companies split taxes with the respective governments.

225 euros with 100 euro Rebate, yet you still pay the 10% vat on 225. 22.50 when the tax should have been 10 euros. Who gets the 12.50?

Only some highly delusional or drunk think those folks running the EU are completely honest. One thread you guys say they are, on the thread about TPB, that judge isn't LOL! Talking about having your cake and eating too

Sir, what does EU stand for and Since when was TBP lawsuit handled by EU?

...and you have guts to call other people ignorant.

[[XC] riptide]

Its called price elasticity. Change up the price 10%, loose 15% in monetary sales. Fail.

[B.E.E.F.]

Its called price elasticity. Change up the price 10%, loose 15% in monetary sales. Fail.

That's if the current price is already at a sweet spot.

[Donnie27]

Sir, what does EU stand for and Since when was TBP lawsuit handled by EU?

...and you have guts to call other people ignorant.

Maybe I gave you too much credit and thought you were more mature than posting such BS. The Example was about some Anti-American BS about ALL U.S. Judges getting paid off or having personal interests in the case

One of the biggest cases in file-sharing history ended last week with The Pirate Bay Four sentenced to huge fines and jail time. Today it is revealed that far from being impartial, the judge in the case is a member of pro-copyright groups - along with Henrik Pontén, Monique Wadsted and Peter Danowsky. There are loud calls for a retrial.

A judge that close to a Case in the US wouldn't even started.

Part two of that was that maybe the EU should handle something that is KNOWN to be illegal and have been for about 50 years in the Music industry That's reference to another poster talking about virtuous the EU was, oh brother! Not that the tried the case but that maybe they should have If the EU is so fair and yada yada!