AMD's numbers are in... $611 million loss

JackPack

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
276
GM went from 58% to 28%. Ridiculous.

"They're just seeing the headlight of the train. It hasn't even hit them yet,'' said Freedman who has a "sell'' rating on the stock and says he doesn't own it. Advanced Micro is suffering because it "tried to get too big too quick.''
 
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
973
There is ongoing costs of any merger in the early days.

Add to this AMD will be taking the opportunity to devaluating certain assets to achieve a decent loss for tax purposes etc, realising with the merger a loss is to be expected and the market will not panic or even think much of it.

The market share loss is more of a concern, the loss on paper is of no concern at all and very predictable.
 

JackPack

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
276
It's not just the merger anymore. $500M drop in accounts receivable means nobody is buying their stale bread. They still have to face a price war in Q2 and Q3.
 

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,064
There is ongoing costs of any merger in the early days.

Add to this AMD will be taking the opportunity to devaluating certain assets to achieve a decent loss for tax purposes etc, realising with the merger a loss is to be expected and the market will not panic or even think much of it.
That's a pretty optimistic/strange analysis. AMD still lost a 1/2 billion dollars without the costs associated with the merger over the last 6 months. It's not a paper loss either. Their cash reserves are dwindling, unit sales are down, market share is down and ASPs are collapsing. AMD's own guidance for the next quarter is "flat," so get ready for even more huge losses -- with or without any continuing costs from the ATI purchase.
 

TheRapture

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 31, 2000
Messages
6,885
they will bounce back!

I hope and pray they bounce back. Trust me, we WANT AMD and Intel to battle, if not, we are all going to pay higher prices for slower than it could be hardware.

Competition is GOOD...I used an AMD X2 3800+ for almost 2 years before I got this C2D...next time I buy, if AMD is better, I will buy them again.
 

RogueTrip

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
2,853
I hope and pray they bounce back. Trust me, we WANT AMD and Intel to battle, if not, we are all going to pay higher prices for slower than it could be hardware.

Competition is GOOD...I used an AMD X2 3800+ for almost 2 years before I got this C2D...next time I buy, if AMD is better, I will buy them again.

Not just for that but also for Nvidia, if AMD goes down, so does ATI at this point.

I owned a P4 w/HT last and would of bought C2D if it was in my budget, but it wasn't worth 500+ to get it (cpu/mobo/ram).

I'm definately not a huge fan of AMD but we need that compitition, and AMD had something good with the A64 and should eventually have it again for a lil while.
 

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
I'll likely buy amd next just to do my little part in keeping them afloat. We absolutely need that competition. The last reign of intel really, really sucked.
 

savantu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
1,325
Intel needs to ease the pressure otherwise AMD might crumble , with their excessive debts , overcapacity problems , no positive cash flow.
The situation is a heck more serious than in 2002.

And this is the piece on the cake :


It was fun while it lasted.

Market analysts say that Intel regained large chunks of market share from AMD in the first quarter. Analyst firm iSuppli says Intel's market share jumped from 75.7 percent in the fourth quarter to 80.2 percent in the first quarter. AMD, meanwhile, sank from 15.7 percent to 11.1 percent.

Sam Bhavnani of Current Analysis, meanwhile, broke it down by type of computer for U.S. retail (about 11 percent of the worldwide market). In desktops, Intel rose from a 46 percent share to a 58 percent share while it saw its notebook market share rise from 66 percent to 72 percent.

In other words , everything that AMD gained in the last 2 years was wiped out in a single quarter.

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9710804-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
 

jon67

Gawd
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
576
Nows the time to buy AMD stock and CPUs
Resist the Dark Side

Why are you contradicting yourself? ;)

On the serious side, this is not looking good for neither AMD nor consumers, so my next system will be AMD if K10 is competitive. Already bought an ATI card this year.
 

DopefishLives

Weaksauce
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
74
I really hope things improve, I'm looking forward to building up a beastly quad-core dual chip system from the AMD house with a nice Crossfire setup with ATI cards. :/

I've always been a fan of AMD, and they were ahead of Intel for awhile with things, particularly with 64 bit processing which they still reign supreme on. Sadly, they missed the boat on DDR2 for almost 4-5 quarters and are still in line to enable on-chip memory controllers which Intel has had for awhile with re CORE chips.

Side note, we just bought four AMD equipped Dell 740's with X2 5000+ (2.6GHz) cpu's. I can't wait for them to arrive; depending upon how we like them we may move to AMD systems at my work and start phasing out Intels a bit -- Yay to Dell for offering AMD's.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
3,343
Don't forget that this is bad for everyone, not just AMD fans. Without a large market share, AMD will not be able to compete effectively with Intel, leaving Intel to pick the prices and release dates of its products at will. Competition in the market results in lower prices and more efficient products for all of us, and it's the reason why Intel was forced to make Core 2 such a kick-ass product.

I don't think any enthusiast would want either company out of business permanently.
 

bigredcat

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
188
AMD is not going any where. Do you think that the US gov't would allow Intel and Nvidia to have a monopoly in their respective fields?

I would truely be shocked and amazed to see AMD be disolved.

I think I have a better chance of seeing flying pigs, hell freeze, etc. :p
 

DopefishLives

Weaksauce
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
74
AMD is not going any where. Do you think that the US gov't would allow Intel and Nvidia to have a monopoly in their respective fields?

I would truely be shocked and amazed to see AMD be disolved.

I think I have a better chance of seeing flying pigs, hell freeze, etc. :p

I doubt they will go anywhere, but I can foresee them having to rally back to their roots for awhile as mass-production chip makers for consumer goods once again and possibly outsource their fabrication facilities to other makers to recoup costs. AMD has an amazing infrastructure but they don't have the sales numbers to match their capabilities. I am going to give it time though because they've fallen back before but I feel that once they get on-chip mem controllers that their performance will shine right along side the Core2 at lower price point.
 

DopefishLives

Weaksauce
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
74
I want to make a correction to my statements earlier. AMD has sported On-Die Integrated Memory Controllers since the launch of the Opteron and HyperTransport.

Intel will be rolling out their On-Die Integrated Memory Controller as an optional component with the new Nehalem architecture.
 

Tetrahedron

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
1,579
661 mill is not much

Bill Gates was worth $96 Billion in 2000 and in 2002 he was worth $56 billion, he lost $40 BILLION DOLLARS of worth!
 

alg7_munif

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
5,862
I think that AMD will gain more profit if they also sell the higher clocked X2s on S939, not just AM2 because I want to upgrade my CPU but I don't want to buy a new mobo and RAM yet. I think that there still a lot of people who think the same, I don't think that it is a good idea to jump to AM2 when the new quad core is just around the corner.
 

bigredcat

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
188
I think that AMD will gain more profit if they also sell the higher clocked X2s on S939, not just AM2 because I want to upgrade my CPU but I don't want to buy a new mobo and RAM yet. I think that there still a lot of people who think the same, I don't think that it is a good idea to jump to AM2 when the new quad core is just around the corner.

Honestly, how many people even use 2 cores.... quad would be 3 unused cores for most people. I do realize that a lot of people here are into running multiple programs on multiple cores, and it will help them. I am talking about the average user. I think the quad core (again for most people) is useless. Just my honest opinion.

AMD is not going anywhere.... Intel !!!!!!'s can stop trying to shout that. No one believes you, and no one cares. Intel !!!!!!'s should be happy that AMD is here to force them to make a better chip. Granted, I will never buy another Intel chip. I had owned way to many of those things and was never impressed. AMD makes a great product, and because of this they will be around for a long time.

PS: I am not calling any of the previous poster Intel !!!!!!'s. They are out there though and they know who they are. :D
 

MrMike

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 4, 2000
Messages
6,511
A drop this large actually surprises me when AMD is still king in memory intensive applications (i.e.: important portions of the server segment.) Although I suppose the most expensive components when I was pricing out the last server I ordered were the RAM and hard drives, I would still think AMD would have more market share.

I would always choose AMD over Intel for a server since the Opteron came out. I have and probably always will choose Intel over AMD for laptops due to the superior battery life and the systems themselves generally running cooler. An exception to this would have been when the P4 was used in laptops. I like to pretend that era of bulky, super-hot "portables" never existed. AMDs solutions were just as bad if not worse.
 

Astral Abyss

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
2,952
Guys, don't forget a lot of a companies "loss" is purely theoretical. The big car companies are famous for this. Here's how it works: AMD puts a retail price on a product of say $400 for a CPU. Price fluctuations and market demand force them to sell the product for $300. They sell 100,000 of them at $300 and claim a $100M loss of their retail price, when all along the $400 price point was set purely on what they wanted to get for it, not on a "bottom line" price value. But now they can tell Uncle Sam they lost $100M and blow away a huge chunk of tax debt. That's how companies can have such huge "losses" and not go bankrupt.
 

mwarps

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2002
Messages
7,059
It will be interesting when all the little intel fan girls dreams come true, when AMD goes under.

Six months after that, they will be sobbing like children when a 2.8 Ghz P4 costs $300 again.
 

mzs_biteme

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 7, 2001
Messages
1,595
It will be interesting when all the little intel fan girls dreams come true, when AMD goes under.

Six months after that, they will be sobbing like children when a 2.8 Ghz P4 costs $300 again.



I don't think anybody in their right mind is rooting for AMD to go under. We NEED the competition... But, as opposed to AMD'ers poking fun at P4's and PD's for being inferior products, Intel'ers :)confused: ) are simply stating that AMD's management has made HUGE mistakes in the last year or two... Everybody agrees that both companies have excellent CPU's at this very moment, but only one company is actually making a profit on theirs.... ;)
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
I don't think anybody in their right mind is rooting for AMD to go under. We NEED the competition... But, as opposed to AMD'ers poking fun at P4's and PD's for being inferior products, Intel'ers :)confused: ) are simply stating that AMD's management has made HUGE mistakes in the last year or two... Everybody agrees that both companies have excellent CPU's at this very moment, but only one company is actually making a profit on theirs.... ;)

QFT! There was talk about a group trying to buy out AMD!

http://www.reuters.com/article/hotStocksNews/idUSN2630551820070226

AMD shares rise on buyout chatter
Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:49PM EST


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shares of Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD.N: Quote, Profile, Research) rose more than 5 percent on Monday amid chatter that the No. 2 maker of computer microprocessors may be a takeover target.

AMD shares climbed to a session high on talk of buyout interest from private equity firms, according to Paul Foster, options strategist at Web information site theflyonthewall.com in Chicago.

They might get bought, but there'd still be an AMD in one form or another. The Germans, the EU and one very large firm here is the US have too much riding on AMD to just watch them do a 3dfx or an Aureal.
 

duby229

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
3,014
Aint nobody gonna buy AMD... They cost too damn much. The only two companies I can think of that have the interets, or the money to buy AMD would be eithe IBM or Intel, and if --either-- one of then did it, the governement would be on there asses faster then a fly on shit.
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
Aint nobody gonna buy AMD... They cost too damn much. The only two companies I can think of that have the interets, or the money to buy AMD would be eithe IBM or Intel, and if --either-- one of then did it, the governement would be on there asses faster then a fly on shit.

The Government would have little to do with Intel or IBM buying up AMD. Most of their holdings are off shore LOL! Remember that's why part of their case was thrown out. Their partner is. AMD Saxonia Manufacturing GmbH, Dresden LOL! There are 10's of thousands Companies and Groups that could buy out AMD. Saxonia GmbH almost nixed the Chartered Deal BTW. If AMD start to out source too much, the Germans and EU takes it out of AMD's pocket. Don't believe me? Look up the agreement?

Barkie doesn't have to just be a hit.
It has to be a Knock out.
It has to be Priced to sale and have a higher ROI.
It has to be HIGH yield with very little waste.
It has to fill many different parts of the market.

So IF it is just like the first two Quarters of the X2 with low yields and high prices, AMD is screwed no matter what its performance numbers look like.
 

duby229

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
3,014
So what are you saying? Go ahead and spit it out... Stop beating around the bush and say it...

Are you saying that AMD is going out of bussiness?
 

Donnie27

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
5,616
So what are you saying? Go ahead and spit it out... Stop beating around the bush and say it...

Are you saying that AMD is going out of bussiness?

Hehehe! Why would I say anything if you're going to say it differently and for me LOL!

"They might get bought, but there'd still be an AMD in one form or another".

That's not quite the same as going out of business;)
 

hardc0re

Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
869
they were recently purchased by ATI for anyone that wasnt paying attention. It also looks like AMD will not be playing in the exclusively CPU club anymore as more doors will be opened with ATI. A company with 10-15% market share does not sink so easily.
 

harpoon

Gawd
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
829
they were recently purchased by ATI for anyone that wasnt paying attention. It also looks like AMD will not be playing in the exclusively CPU club anymore as more doors will be opened with ATI. A company with 10-15% market share does not sink so easily.

Err... no, how about ATI was bought by AMD?! :rolleyes: ;)

Here's a harrowing figure:

AMD/ATIs combined revenue for Q1 2007 is LOWER than AMDs sole revenue in Q1 2006.
 

duby229

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
3,014
It was the other way around AMD bought ATi....

@Donnie, I think you should actually read the conference call... It specifically talks about what your predicting. It aint gonna happen. AMD is too big to buy. The only two companies that could buy it cant, because the government would jump down there throats faster then a frog swallows a fly. You claim that wouldnt happen for whatever reason, but we have Antitrust laws in place for a reason.

You claim that a whole host of other companies could buy AMD, I dont think soooo... How many companies out there have at least 15-20 billion dollars to spare? Not many.... Just Intel, and IBM...
 

osalcido

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
1,481
AMD is not going any where. Do you think that the US gov't would allow Intel and Nvidia to have a monopoly in their respective fields?

I would truely be shocked and amazed to see AMD be disolved.

I think I have a better chance of seeing flying pigs, hell freeze, etc. :p

well it is a free market... the government can't do much other than bail them out (i.e. what they do with Boeing and Amtrak) which wouldn't happen because that only happens when there's no other supplier to give people the products or services
 

osalcido

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
1,481
It was the other way around AMD bought ATi....

@Donnie, I think you should actually read the conference call... It specifically talks about what your predicting. It aint gonna happen. AMD is too big to buy. The only two companies that could buy it cant, because the government would jump down there throats faster then a frog swallows a fly. You claim that wouldnt happen for whatever reason, but we have Antitrust laws in place for a reason.

You claim that a whole host of other companies could buy AMD, I dont think soooo... How many companies out there have at least 15-20 billion dollars to spare? Not many.... Just Intel, and IBM...

IBM and AMD could merge.. that'd be awesome. Intel would finally have equal competition.
New company would be called ATIBMD
 

duby229

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
3,014
Actually I think Intel has equal competition with the new AMD+ATi company....

Once the restructuring is complete by the end of this year, I think AMD and Intel will be on equal footing as far as potential goes. I could easily see a 50/50 market by the end of 2010
 

SNYP40A1

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
253
Honestly, how many people even use 2 cores.... quad would be 3 unused cores for most people. I do realize that a lot of people here are into running multiple programs on multiple cores, and it will help them. I am talking about the average user. I think the quad core (again for most people) is useless. Just my honest opinion.

AMD is not going anywhere.... Intel !!!!!!'s can stop trying to shout that. No one believes you, and no one cares. Intel !!!!!!'s should be happy that AMD is here to force them to make a better chip. Granted, I will never buy another Intel chip. I had owned way to many of those things and was never impressed. AMD makes a great product, and because of this they will be around for a long time.

PS: I am not calling any of the previous poster Intel !!!!!!'s. They are out there though and they know who they are. :D

I agree that quad core is probably over-hyped, but it's great for Computational Biology and scientific computing application. Now, Intel has the right to hype a feature that no one really needs because AMD, their competition was doing exactly the same with an even less useful feature, 64-bit.
 
Top