Regulators Avoiding Intel Investigation&#63

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
According to the Associated Press, Federal regulators appear to be resisting a formal probe of Intel’s alleged anticompetitive practices despite requests from members of Congress and corporate rivals.

One accusation is that Intel gives rebates to computer maker customers on the condition they not buy some AMD products, a charge the Santa Clara, Calif.-based company included in a 2005 lawsuit against Intel. The company "has illegally abused its monopoly position," AMD spokesman Mike Silverman said. "We encourage all antitrust enforcers around the world, including in the United States, to stop illegal conduct."
Click to expand...
 
Doesn't it always seem funny to you that this is always coming from someone at AMD?
 
Don't forget AMD spending $200K lobbybucks to get a pathetic 2 congressmen to join in on their incompendetta.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jryvQhSOy7hMlusIf02BtkYCSi1g

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."
Click to expand...

$200K gets you a seat at the table, but no money left for chips (<- punny) when it comes to buying congressmen. :p It obviously didn't work so maybe they sue to get their money back.
 
It's the American way...
If you can't beat them, sue them...
 
Would be easier to just pour the money back into R&D, but they'd rather be idiots and gamble it off.

Fine by me, I'll enjoy my 32nm Nehalem with a cold beer.
 
Emission said:
Would be easier to just pour the money back into R&D, but they'd rather be idiots and gamble it off. {/QUOTE]

It's sad... they blow millions on ATi (and fuck them up), and now they're blowing millions to try to get back at Intel. How much of all that money could have gone into working on Barcelona, and had it earlier and better?
Click to expand...
 
The funny thing is back when AMD was actually beating Intel in performance companies like Dell didn't use their CPU's.Now they do,but everyone is buying Intel systems.Maybe Intel did use some questionable tactics in the past,but AMD only has themselves to blame for their current problems.It's simply a case of Intel putting out the better product.
 
Looks like they have that corrupt Sen. Schumer in their pockets too, since he wants AMD to open a plant in NY. This is exactly why regulatory agencies like the FTC are independent (as opposed to, say, Justice), to resist political pressure.

pxc said:
Don't forget AMD spending $200K lobbybucks to get a pathetic 2 congressmen to join in on their incompendetta.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jryvQhSOy7hMlusIf02BtkYCSi1g



$200K gets you a seat at the table, but no money left for chips (<- punny) when it comes to buying congressmen. :p It obviously didn't work so maybe they sue to get their money back.
Click to expand...
 
I can understand ppl are saying "AMD Sucks now, that's why they need to sue!" in today's perspective but these suits were started back in 2005 when AMD was firmly in the lead with X2. AMD should've taken on much more marketshare than they had before C2Ds arrival. Japananese and Korean 'FTC's are going after Intel and finding evidence, so why not do an investigation in the US? I think money under the table is involved here somewhere.
 
If Intel is using uncompetitive/illegal trade practices, they should be dealt with.
 
I vaguely remember X2s being priced at $800 for the 4800+ model, Intel brought decent prices back to the table, so why are we pointing fingers?
 
Monkey God said:
If Intel is using uncompetitive/illegal trade practices, they should be dealt with.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't understand why people are getting on AMD's back about this whole thing. I'd be pissed too if someone told all my resellers that they'd get a special bonus by removing my products from their stores. Anyone would be.

I guess it's easier to be an Intel fanboy. We'll see how they react when they see their despised AMD go down the drain and Intel increasing their price threefold and not releasing new processors as fast.
 
Azhar said:
Yeah, I don't understand why people are getting on AMD's back about this whole thing. I'd be pissed too if someone told all my resellers that they'd get a special bonus by removing my products from their stores. Anyone would be.

I guess it's easier to be an Intel fanboy. We'll see how they react when they see their despised AMD go down the drain and Intel increasing their price threefold and not releasing new processors as fast.
Click to expand...

Word.

And before anyone accuses me of being an AMD nutswinger, check my sig.
 
The idea that anyone believes that Intel would immediately go into monopolization mode after AMDs fall is short-sighted. Since when is AMD the only competitor Intel has? It's not even that, they're on track with updates after updates, and I see no reason for them to slow down the pace if one of their competitors falls.
 
Emission said:
The idea that anyone believes that Intel would immediately go into monopolization mode after AMDs fall is short-sighted. Since when is AMD the only competitor Intel has? It's not even that, they're on track with updates after updates, and I see no reason for them to slow down the pace if one of their competitors falls.
Click to expand...

Immediately? Maybe not, but they sure as hell wouldn't wait long.
What other competition does Intel have in the PC Market? VIA?
 
Monkey God said:
Immediately? Maybe not, but they sure as hell wouldn't wait long.
What other competition does Intel have in the PC Market? VIA?
Click to expand...

I just snorted pop through my nose laughing. Thanks alot :p

Intel's only other "competition" was Motorola with their processors for Macs, and we all know what happened there.
 
Emission said:
It might help if you actually looked once in a while :).
Click to expand...

In the main x86 microprocessor market? You must be kidding... There is only Intel, AMD, VIA and Tranmeta. The other microprocessor companies out there don't do x86 and are therefore basically non-existant to those of us using Windows or now, even Macs since MAC OS is ported to x86. Be assured, If AMD falls, VIA and Tranmeta will surely remain marginalized indefinately or eventually bankrupt leaving only Intel in the x86 market, as they both have nowhere near the size or marketshare AMD has much less Intel has in the x86 market. I can assure you Intel will see to that, for one very simple reason: Intel remembers Zilog!

Now judging from what I remember back in the 90s when Intel basically dominated the market, you tell me what you think is going to happen? Never mind, I'll tell you, it will be the same thing all over again! Intel's quasi-monopoly will be no question! And God helps us all if that happens, I dare not think if they were ever to single handedly move the desktop and mobile markets from x86 to Itanium based systems.

As for other markets, sure there is competition, like Nvidia(discrete/intergrated graphics, chipsets), SiS(chipsets) and ALi(chipsets). However the microprocessor is the brains, requires the most R&D to produce and currently rules the market being it's a general purpose x86 processor, the most common processor on the planet in personal PCs. Therefore, everything else is a footnote IMHO. The only real opposition I can somewhat see rising up at that point would be Nvidia and well... Let's just say they have a long row to hoe to get into the x86 general microprocessor realm before Intel gets it's own discrete graphics division up and running.
 
If we take a moment to look at the big picture, Intel wants AMD to exist. And here's why:

A, because they don't want to be a de facto monopoly, due to the fact that huge government regulation is involved, and
B, they may not get contracts because some people won't sign them unless there's a competitor/second source.

They'll try to make their line-up look less attractive for the sake of keeping AMD rolling. Keep in mind just how *big* Intel is. AMD is suffering hard times because they got complacent when K8 was the big star. They started to slack behind, and Intel came out of nowhere with a major punch that AMD wasn't ready for.

This is nothing to be afraid of, just another record for the history books where it's Intel's turn to take over for a little while.
 
Wow, the Intel zealots are going nuts.

This is the SAME ISSUE that was started back when AMD was firmly in the lead. There is a MASSIVE amount of evidence against Intel. Intel has ALREADY been found guilty in Japan. The only reason it's taking so long here is because Intel lines so many pockets. South Korea has filed charges as the result of a 2 year anti-trust investigation. The EU has already brought forth charges of antitrust.

You can cry all you want about AMD just suing because they're losing. The fact remains that Intel has been found guilty or is being charged in the worlds largest markets for a reason. Had the government not been so crooked the investigation in the US would have started 2 years ago.
 
Emission said:
If we take a moment to look at the big picture, Intel wants AMD to exist. And here's why:

A, because they don't want to be a de facto monopoly, due to the fact that huge government regulation is involved, and
B, they may not get contracts because some people won't sign them unless there's a competitor/second source.

They'll try to make their line-up look less attractive for the sake of keeping AMD rolling. Keep in mind just how *big* Intel is. AMD is suffering hard times because they got complacent when K8 was the big star. They started to slack behind, and Intel came out of nowhere with a major punch that AMD wasn't ready for.

This is nothing to be afraid of, just another record for the history books where it's Intel's turn to take over for a little while.
Click to expand...

Don't remember pre-AMD processor prices, huh? There are regulations on monopolies, but Intel will still turn far more profit if everyone in the world is forced to buy their product. Both prices and sales will rise.
 
How come no one cares that the regulators are resisting to investigate?

Do they already know that Intel has done nothing wrong? That sounds just as shitty to me as AMD forcing the hand. Investigate, and if Intel is free and clear then call AMD out on it.
 
Nemesis999 said:
You can cry all you want about AMD just suing because they're losing.
Click to expand...
Naw, it's AMD that's doing the crying. This was just a rehash of the stuff the FTC threw out years ago and it's no surprise that the FTC isn't hearing the boy cry wolf again.

To show how horribly AMD is run, this is all they have to show after about 40 years in business: http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=26010831&sort=postdate

If AMD could get it's act together it could do well, instead of just blaming everyone else for their incompetence.
 
mdameron said:
How come no one cares that the regulators are resisting to investigate?

Do they already know that Intel has done nothing wrong? That sounds just as shitty to me as AMD forcing the hand. Investigate, and if Intel is free and clear then call AMD out on it.
Click to expand...
Because that's not what the FTC said. AMD is lobbying to get the FTC to "formally" investigate Intel, which would normally be reserved for uncooperative targets. The FTC is saying that Intel is already cooperating with document requests so there's no need at this time to open a formal investigation.

The next step is for the FTC to send the findings to a 5 person panel (which doesn't include the head of the FTC) to have a simple vote on whether or not to proceed from there.

This is just AMD desperation. Back to the EU for a moment since it's related, AMD has done both things they complain about Intel doing: sell chips below cost to targeted customers in order to gain business and run a rebate program. Google it if you don't believe it.

What you're asking is analogous to demanding that the police arrest and jail every suspect. If they're innocent, they'll go free (eventually), right?
 
pxc said:
Because that's not what the FTC said. AMD is lobbying to get the FTC to "formally" investigate Intel, which would normally be reserved for uncooperative targets. The FTC is saying that Intel is already cooperating with document requests so there's no need at this time to open a formal investigation.

The next step is for the FTC to send the findings to a 5 person panel (which doesn't include the head of the FTC) to have a simple vote on whether or not to proceed from there.

This is just AMD desperation. Back to the EU for a moment since it's related, AMD has done both things they complain about Intel doing: sell chips below cost to targeted customers in order to gain business and run a rebate program. Google it if you don't believe it.

What you're asking is analogous to demanding that the police arrest and jail every suspect. If they're innocent, they'll go free (eventually), right?
Click to expand...

Well I also believe that corporations deserve less rights than the individual. They contribute much more of everything to the economy and should be monitored. Not socialist style control, but they shouldn't be trusted.
 
pxc said:
This is just AMD desperation. Back to the EU for a moment since it's related, AMD has done both things they complain about Intel doing: sell chips below cost to targeted customers in order to gain business and run a rebate program. Google it if you don't believe it.
Click to expand...

Here's a shocker. The whole POINT of selling products below cost is to force your competition to sell below cost and therefor go bankrupt. SURPRISE. The whole point is that Intel, who held a near-monopoly position, operated at a loss to force their competition to operate at a loss, thereby forcing bankruptcy. Of course AMD had to sell below cost, that's what Intel forced them to do. Guess what? It's ILLEGAL to do that from a monopoly position. Essentially Intel was paying money to prevent competition.
 
Nemesis999 said:
The whole point is that Intel, who held a near-monopoly position, operated at a loss to force their competition to operate at a loss, thereby forcing bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
LOL

You're not getting the point. AMD, Intel or whoever might sell some products below costs to certain customers in order to get rid of inventory or get their foot into a market. That does not mean a company is forced to do so in a bid situation, it is only by choice. AMD feels it is free to offer strategic below cost discounts, but cries when Intel does the same. :rolleyes: That hypocrisy flies in Soviet Brussels, but thankfully not here.

AMD had/has huge problems with debt and non-competitive/overpriced products in the last year. It's crazy that 12 months ago AMD was basing rosy projections in the face of that and knowing full well they wouldn't have better products for over a year, nevermind how uncompetitive the "savior" Barcelona product would be for 98% of the server market.

Intel has "operated at a loss" for only 2 quarters in its whole existance (one time in the mid-80s and one time in the early 70s), so I don't where your outrageous claim is coming from. It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest Intel is or was operating at a loss to counter AMD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top