Thursday, January 11, 2007

Patty calls Paul

Patty: Paul, great news! Our strategy is working!

Paul: Yes?

Patty: AMD's warned huge. Its 4Q06 revenue grew only 3% from 3Q06, and only up 1.5% from 4Q05. I hate AMD and now I am happy.

Paul: Okay.

Patty: You don't sound very excited. I know our numbers will be $9.4, 10% below last year. But, hey, that's still 8% above our Q3, better than AMD's 3%.

Paul: Well.

Patty: How much bonus will I get? I heard that board approved a big bonus for you.

Paul: Pat, I have to tell you the truth, don't hold your expectations too high.

Patty: What? We beat AMD to the punch. Analysts say our 4Q06 revenue will grow 8% from Q3.

Paul: Pat, our revenue will be down from 3Q06.

Patty: How come?

Paul: we lost market share and our price didn't hold. AMD's market share is now about 27%. Run rate clsoe to 40%.

Patty: then why are you getting a bonus?

Paul: Well, this might be my last chance, Ruiz is simply screwing us in the market, he basically forgo profits and take market share at all costs.

Patty: I hate them.

Paul: Don't be so emotional, this is just business, you may want to apply for a job from them in 2008.

Patty: Why?

Paul: You will see our results and know why.

67 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lame!!! How about a real comment doc? Intel BK? AMD 40% runrate? Amd Q4 earnings? Intel can't get rid of inventory huh, I wonder how they still managed to make 9.6b. Oh and they also got back some market share and got their margins up above 50%, all this with only being 25% Core2 Duo. Q2 looks even better.

12:31 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Psst...revenue will be up from 8.7b in Q3 to 9.4b in Q4. If you mean earnings then they will be up as well from 22c to 25c.

12:54 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh my dear god. That was so not funny. Sheez, shouldn't you just keep up with that Intel bankrupt prediction? That was hilarious.

You need to get a new hobby. With something you CAN do.

12:54 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmmm maybe it's time to sell.

http://chip.seekingalpha.com/article/23367

12:57 AM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger 180 Sharikou said...

My dear Doctor - yet again your displaced sense of loyalty will force you to eat crow.

Intel will definitely come in above the 8.7 billion and the 22 cents EPS they had in Q306. They will do this on the strength of growth in servers and increased shipments of C2D mobile parts.

http://sharikou180.blogspot.com/2007/01/whats-quarter-going-to-look-like.html

Sharikou 180

1:46 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Pat, our revenue will be down from 3Q06."

Do you mean profit here? (or maybe Q4'05?) Even earlier in your little fantasy land you acknowledge the street is expecting at least 8% revenue INCREASE over Q3...

And with all that additional ramping of AMD capacity, not to mention revenues from ATI , why are revenues only up expected to be up 3% for AMD? Did they give back some notebook share? (some of Intel's expected revenue increase is supposedly due to better than expected NB demand)

Either way will soon be in quarter 3 of your expected "7 consecutive quarterly losses" prediction.

How's that one working out for you?

Oh and we still on for 40% market share runrate?

1:57 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your blog should be called
"Journal of PERVERSIVE 64bit Computing"...

2:18 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about some real analysis Sharikou? You don't make a very good comedian... then again, you don't make a very good analyst either.

Perhaps you should stick to 'system abuse', you're probably quite good at that. ;)

2:27 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Paul: I'm confused, AMD has warned about lower profits and revenues than expected and we are at the high end of expectations. Why are these going in the opposite direction?

Patty: I'm not sure what you mean.

Paul: Well there's this Sharikou character who keeps advising me to raise chip prices as this price war is obviously hurting us more than AMD, since AMD sells every chip that it makes and it's capacity is skyrocketing.

Patty: I don't understand how could our revenue be growing faster if they are increasing capacity, their manufacturing costs are lower and yields are higher. It would seem the price war is hurting AMD more...

Paul: Well Sharikou tells me AMD has this magic process where they can make chips all the way out to 0mm edge exclusion and has these dicing machines which are so good they don't need any spacing betwen chips. He also tells me they make chips at ~1/2 the cost of ours.

Pat: Given all this shouldn't their revenue and normalized profit (factoring in relative market share) be much better than ours?

Paul: Yeah he tells me that as market share is roughly 3:1, overall earnings should also be roughly 3:2 factoring in AMD's lower production cost.

Patty: So if this Sharikou's #'s are right, AMD's profits should be roughly 66% of ours?

Paul: You would think that but somehow that is not the case, I guess maybe our chips really don't cost twice as much to produce. Also we seem to sell chips at a higher average selling price, despite having "thrown away" our Pentium brand.

Patty: Hey maybe we should hire this Sharikou on as his predictions appear to almost always be true.

Paul: Unfortunately we will be bankrupt soon so we won't be able to afford him. Plus we've fired him previously. Also his predictions aren't quite that accurate - we need to start giving away some money so his "massive operating loss" and "7 consecutive quarter starting Q3'06" can come true - perhap we can give it to AMD to help them out with their debt and so they can join the 21st century and get a 2nd 300mm fab going.

2:51 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Then why are you getting a bonus"

Intel 45nm samples:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5657

Of course it wasn't running task manager like K8l...but as Sharikou and others pointed out if it can run all that MS code and still boot...

Oh and by the way that 45nm will start at mature process performance targets, unlike AMD's 65nm process which will take >1 year (at least end 2007) to hit ITRS targets. This means AMD will effectively be one full technology node behind (2 years) despite the smoke and mirror PR work being done by AMD to produce a 90nm process technology with 65nm printing and claim they are only a year behind.

Similarly expect AMD's 45nm to offer (initially) nothing but a shrink in litho dimensions and take a full year or so to get to performance targets.

What will really be a kick in the ass is expect Intel to announce the 45nm process to have high K/metal gate implemented which IBM has pushed to at least the 32nm node. (and therefore AMD as they do not have the process know how in this area).

HighK/metal gate has the potential for huge off state power gains due to reduced gate leakage issues (potential for 1000-10000X gate leakage reduction). This may give Intel a substantial power, in addition to clock speed advantage between their 65nm and 45nm nodes.

3:43 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poor Intel.They've thrown their best effort, Core2Dud, at AMD and still AMD'S revenue increases!

3:45 AM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger Roborat, Ph. D. said...

Nice to see that now you admit to the following...

Sharikou posted:
1) AMD's warned huge. Its 4Q06 revenue grew only 3% from 3Q06, and only up 1.5% from 4Q05
2) beat AMD to the punch. Analysts say our 4Q06 revenue will grow 8% from Q3

Intel BK in what quarter again?

4:01 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You little f*ck; why not analyze the HUGE miss. You claim to write an objective blog but it has deteriorated in the last few weeks. Last few weeks you've been dissing Sun and now on a day when your favorite AMD warned you are focussing on Intel!

4:24 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm surprised at this blog. It is communist ideology of the worst kind. We live in a capitalist world - the USSR is long gone. The market clearly prefers Intel. When Intel goofs, they'll buy AMD. Why force the issue with one or the other? The microprocessor market doesn't need forced equality, it can manage just fine.

5:50 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don’t want to burst your bobble but if AMD gained 3% and Intel gained 8% don’t that mean that Intel either gained market share or that their processors are not worthless crap?

I love how you try to turn a bad earnings warning from AMD into something positive.

6:22 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you notice AMD takes a hit because they will fall short of the STREET price, but Intel says they’ll come in at INTEL’s midrange estimates not the whisper price like AMD.

6:30 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous enumae said...

YOY = Year over year.
PQ = Versus previous quarter.

AMD

Q1 05 = 1.227 vs Q1 06 = 1.332

/+8% YOY/ -- /-28% PQ/

Q2 05 = 1.260 vs Q2 06 = 1.216

/-3% YOY/ -- /-9% PQ/

Q3 05 = 1.523 vs Q3 06 = 1.327

/-14% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 1.838 vs (Estimated) Q4 06 = 1.360

/-35% YOY/ -- /+3% PQ/

Intel

Q1 05 = 9.400 vs Q1 06 = 8.940

/-5% YOY/ -- /-14% PQ/

Q2 05 = 9.200 vs Q2 06 = 8.009

/-14% YOY/ -- /-11% PQ/

Q3 05 = 9.960 vs Q3 06 = 8.739

/-13% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 10.201 vs Q4 06 = 9.400

/-8% YOY/ -- /+7% PQ/

-----------------------------------

It would seem AMD is suffering more from the pricewar than Intel.

6:51 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about some reality:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36914

8:07 AM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger S said...

AMD has been missing estimates for last 3 quarters.

I'd be surprised if Intel misses estimates let alone coming in lower than Q3 revenue. That will be a first ever for Intel and will only means bottom has fallen off the market.

You are kidding yourself.

8:32 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So everyone in the entire analyst community is wrong and you, oh Sharidouche G.E.D, are right?

I can't wait to see what sort of perverted twist you put on all of this later today. This is why I come here...for my daily humor.

AMD stock - down 10%. Yep, they're going to own Intel....

9:13 AM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger Stephen said...

I don't understand the big deal. AMD's shares took a tumble, so what? They've been on a downward hill since they did nothing to respond to Core 2, it's their own fault.

9:44 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharikou guess what you where right!

You only guessed wrong about the FX using the AM2 instead of the FX.

New Egg as the FX-74 at 550.00
FX-72 450.00
And the FX-70 for just 309.99!!!!!

And I must add this, you said it was two 3800+ (at 1.8Ghz each) but its at 2.6GHz. Wooo!
You must be a witch!

I’m just going to wait for more 4x4 mobos offerings and I have a system to buy!

Here is what sharikou said:
"No. I am absolutely certain that AMD will allow people to use lower speed AM2s in 4x4. Two FX62s is a overkill for Conroe. Two X2 3800+ at $290 each is more than enough to frag any Conroe. I personally would like to have a 4x4 with two 35 watt X2 3800+. The configuration will be
1) 4x4 MB: $200
2) Two X2 3800+ (2GHZ) energy efficient 35 watt max. Total 70 watts max, 8GHZ compute cycles total. Total cost $620.
3) One graphics card ( I am not a gamer)
"


Sharikou!!! Sharikou!!! Sharikou!!!
Intel FUD boys must apologize to sharikou!

10:10 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmm...and whats this I'm reading about AMD piling up inventory?!!?!?

Guess they AREN'T selling everything they can make...

The hits keep coming....

11:00 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From an upbeat December 2006 analyst meeting to the traditional AMD January surprise, AMD has cornholled its investors once more.

How is anyone to believe anything that comes out of Hector's stinking mouth?

AMD 65nm is a bust;AMD 65nm parts perform slower than AMD 90nm parts due to increased cache latencies and are hopeless overclockers. People willing to pay an extra 35 watts in power come in our store seek out 90nm parts because they perform better!

Customers are angry because AM2 parts we sold cant be used in 4x4, more would be complaining if 4x4 had not turned out to be such a power hungry and underperforming dog.

Then comes news that Intel's 45nm Penryn core is running Windows on rev 0 silicon, meaning it will probably be pulled in, which is not good news for AMD and K8L.

AMD sows confusion and requires us to stock too many SKU's because they keep changing the CPU socket.

With Intel we only stock 775PGA boards with 965 or 975 chipsets and they run everything, including Celeron, P4, P4D, C2D, C2Q. Intel is doing it right and AMD is chocking the chicken.

11:14 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you can not help being a bitter person, can you?

Think of better ways to spin out this news or your failed predictions!

The news is AMD messed up, remember!

11:42 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you can not help being a bitter person, can you?

Think of better ways to spin out this news or your failed predictions!

The news is AMD messed up, remember!

11:42 AM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is Intel's fault. They monopolized the market. Without it Amd could have put more people to develop 65nm. And why 65nm and k8l are "late" is because Intel's monopoly began to break only after this new lawsuit from Amd. It's the first time really Amd started making money and selling chips like crazy. They had to produce more those opteron cores at 90nm. Manufacturing was their 1st priority. So development suffered.

1:09 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Manufacturing was their 1st priority. So development suffered."

WTF - they are using IBM for their 65nm technology, was IBM busy making 90nm chips for AMD too? They have this magical APM3.0, doesn't that develop the process all by itself? (sarcasm ,folks)

And 90nm has been running FOR A WHILE! F30 has been ramped for some time and the F36 "ramp" is a joke - they had planned to start shipping product from their in Q1'06 (they actually made revenue shipments in March or April) - and now nearly a year later they are ~50-60% ramped of what is a relatively small fab (5K WSPW). By the time this thing is fully ramped it will be 18-24months...

To put things in perspective for everyone, F36 is now "ramped" to approximately the size of the production in Intel's development fab. If this is their "focus" on capacity they are in a world of hurt, especially if they intend to start manufacturing ATI(AMD) graphics parts in house anytime soon. Well at least the NY fab will be online soon - what was 2009, 2010 timeframe?

2:07 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"This is Intel's fault. They monopolized the market. Without it Amd could have put more people to develop 65nm. And why 65nm and k8l are "late" is because Intel's monopoly began to break only after this new lawsuit from Amd. It's the first time really Amd started making money and selling chips like crazy. They had to produce more those opteron cores at 90nm. Manufacturing was their 1st priority. So development suffered. "

Just. Shut. Up.

When you know what you're talking about, post something intelligent, otherwise you're just as bad as the retard that owns this blog.

2:52 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharikou, you forgot to remind people that Intel are using ENRON accounting standards!

4:17 PM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

(potential for 1000-10000X gate leakage reduction)

Just like 10 GHz and 20 GHz Pentiums... wow, THAT much potential!

I guess because Intel said it, it must be true!

4:39 PM, January 12, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...


Hmm...and whats this I'm reading about AMD piling up inventory?!!?!?


I guess you've never heard of building inventory for product transition?

And I guess you've never heard of building inventory for process (65nm) transition?

No? It doesn't surprise me at all!

4:41 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


New Egg as the FX-74 at 550.00
FX-72 450.00
And the FX-70 for just 309.99!!!!!


That's for one processor. You need two to use 4x4.

6:56 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well well well! Guess who has a buildup of inventory?

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20070112VL200.html

Man, all this bad news for AMD must be deeply depressing. Don't go jumping off buildings now, we need you to keep providing us with your daily comedy fix until Q2 2008, when AMD's world domination will be complete. LOL

7:51 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AMDs 3% increase in sales will knock intel out of the first place in semi conductor sales after a 13 year run.
AMDs market share has grown again.
Intels antique platforms with the worthless FSB which is too small for 4 and 8 core systems will bury intel.
Super charged pentium 3s will not save intel from there antique platform problems.
This is the beginning of the end for intel.

7:57 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sharikou,

It seems the only person who keep fragging himself is YOU?

Congratulations!

8:02 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL what a company.. Sharikou the pHD pretender is in la la land..

Today AMD dropped a bomb, more like last night.

DId it as everyone was at CES and hoping no one would notice?

Did it right after they borrowed a bundle of cash telling all the lenders all was good. Then turning around and telling all how bad it was.


Who is going BK

WHo is an idiot

Sharikou you are so jealous and envious of Patty and Paul.

TOo bad you are too incompent to every have a real job contributing in technology. All you can do is rant on your blog..

You are worth a good laugh with a beer.

Keep us entertained...

Glad you got canned by INTEL in the last round of layoffs

8:30 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why is Patty calling Paul..

An inquirer quote "Most of AMD's woes have been because Intel has been successfully fighting back for market share and the two chipmakers have been involved in a price war."

Paul " How are we doing?"

Patty: "Core 2 is kicking a$$"

Paul " How? "

Patty: " Core2 is kicking a$$"

When is INTEL going to BK now Sharikou?

8:34 PM, January 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Conroe and other newer Intel processors are proving two things, at least:
Intel, in the past, has only joked and fooled customers making CRAP, too overpriced cpus.
AMD has forced Intel to make better processor, even better than AMD's one, at more right price.
All I feel now is only gratefulness to AMD, at this point. I feel AMD "progressive" and Intel "scanty conservative as Uncle Scrooge".

12:30 AM, January 13, 2007  
Blogger Khafra said...

I visited this blog 2 days ago and the supposed "conversation" was entirely different,

What gives?

4:07 AM, January 13, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at this! http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20061226153755.html

AMD is going to SLOWLY migrate to K8L! So much for Sharikou claiming AMD will magically switch overnight from K8 to K8L thanks to it's magical fabs that can change transistors on the fly and all the rest of it lolol.

AM2+ will be incompatible with AM2 as well. There will be no quad core or K8L for AM2.

4:29 AM, January 13, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Q1 05 = 1.227 vs Q1 06 = 1.332

/+8% YOY/ -- /-28% PQ/

Q2 05 = 1.260 vs Q2 06 = 1.216

/-3% YOY/ -- /-9% PQ/

Q3 05 = 1.523 vs Q3 06 = 1.327

/-14% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 1.838 vs (Estimated) Q4 06 = 1.360

/-35% YOY/ -- /+3% PQ/

Intel

Q1 05 = 9.400 vs Q1 06 = 8.940

/-5% YOY/ -- /-14% PQ/

Q2 05 = 9.200 vs Q2 06 = 8.009

/-14% YOY/ -- /-11% PQ/

Q3 05 = 9.960 vs Q3 06 = 8.739

/-13% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 10.201 vs Q4 06 = 9.400

/-8% YOY/ -- /+7% PQ/

-----------------------------------

It would seem AMD is suffering more from the pricewar than Intel.

///////////////////
I think you have included AMDs flash revs for your 2005figures

Paarl

5:41 AM, January 13, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poeple like this should be sued for misinform the market.

6:15 AM, January 13, 2007  
Blogger Scientia from AMDZone said...

enumae

Those numbers you gave weren't just cooked; they were carbonized. Please stop trying to dredge even deeper into the slime.

AMD did not lose year over year in 2006; 2006 shows growth from 2005. However, Intel did indeed lose from 2005. I'll do an article on this but not before the actual numbers are out from both Intel and AMD.

It is not possible that Intel did better in terms of revenue for 2006 because they shrank while AMD grew. However, it is possible that Intel gained back some revenue or volume share in Q4.

10:04 AM, January 13, 2007  
Anonymous koboi said...

Guys, why do you even bother discussing this shit here? I believe you're not stupid enough to not realizing that this website is designed to generate ad clicks...

11:51 PM, January 13, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow - instead of posting useful information you just added onto this little worthless tidbit.

You haven't updated your blog or responses in two days now Sharidouche, are you still crying into you pillow?

9:18 AM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wah wah wah wah..

THis is all INTEL's fault...

Damm, they produced a better product that crushes AMD products

Damm, they have better factories and silicon technology at produce more die/wafer, have faster silicon, have higher yield. Damm those INTEL people for executing

Damm, they they have more factories making more die then we can... and selling to more customers..

Damm our miss is all intel's fault.

They are cheating by being good.

BK who is going to Burger King for the 2.99 value meal? Sharikou thats all he can afford.

INTEL is kicking AMD all around, in the market place, at the CES, in profits and also in the stock market. They are doing it be cheating according to Sharikou...

Wah Wah Wah

12:10 PM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sharikou

why didnt you do your usual analysis on the Q4 earning?

7:20 PM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous enumae said...

Scientia said...

Those numbers you gave weren't just cooked; they were carbonized....

I am not trying to cook anything. If I have a mistake, please point it out. I have not intention to post incorrect numbers.

I will look at them again.

8:50 PM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous enumae said...

Paarl said...

"I think you have included AMDs flash revs for your 2005 figures"

If I had it was not intended and I will correct this error.

8:56 PM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharikou is a fraud people, why do you try to give him the benefit of the doubt? Just go back and read some of his previous garbage and you will see that he has no credibality. Scientia even though he is biased towards Amd he will at least be a bit more rational, so why don't we just move this fight over to Scientia's blog and leave this loser to his imaginary BK, frag, exploding chip world.

9:23 PM, January 14, 2007  
Anonymous edward said...

"why don't we just move this fight over to Scientia's blog and leave this loser to his imaginary BK, frag, exploding chip world."

I actually think it's pretty amusing and inventive - if I may - for Sharikou to come up with these AMD-favoring and Intel-"BK" arguments.

While I'm favoring AMD myself, and I do so for good reasons (like it or not, my programs just run faster on K8), I honestly come here for amusement.

12:53 AM, January 15, 2007  
Blogger Roborat, Ph. D. said...

Don’t forget to listen to Intel’s earning’s report tomorrow:
Margins significantly up ~52% (AMD significantly down)
Earnings at $9.6B, up 10% from previous QTR.
2007 GUIDANCE TO BE RAISED!!!

I’m sorry. Did you say something about someone being bankrupt?

2:09 AM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"AMD's market share is now about 27%. Run rate clsoe to 40%.

Please note - this is the first in a series of statements as Shari-kook attempts to tell everyone how his prediction of 40% market share is "right like most of my predictions"

Anyone else wondering how 27% market share (which by the way there is no data out yet to support) might equate to 40% RUNRATE?

Even IFFFFF the 27% was true, AMD entered the quarter with what 23%, 24% market share - how would that get to 40% runrate?

Oh, Sharikou - how's that massive operating loss prediction turning out for you? We are in quarter 2 of the 7 consecutive Intel operating loss quarters, no?

I hope you are getting ready to cook the books when Intel's #'s come out tomorrow so you can tell us all how bad they are and that BK is not only inevitable, but has been accelerated!

Looks like Intel margin up, AMD margin down - hmmm those 300mm cost savings really appear to be giving AMD an advantage. Rather funny how Intel's margins are going UP in a price war. Especially as they have:
1) Been running 300mm for some time and already ramped 65nm so there shouldn't be much cost savings on manufacturing side
2) Laid off a bunch of people resulting in a bunch of one time costs in Q3/Q4 (they have to pay all those severance packages)

Funny in a time where Intel's manufacturing cost should be flat, prices are dropping, one time fixed costs have gone up - their margins are going up? Can you explain this, "doctor"? (Hint: think server and/or mobile mix and high end desktop share)

1:57 PM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nothing from the retard in a few days. He must be really struggling to come up with something...

2:56 PM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Patty: Boy, this blog sure has gone to shit.

Paul: Just like AMD's stock price.

Patty: I bet Sharikook hung himself

Paul: I bet it sounded like "aww SNAP"

3:42 PM, January 15, 2007  
Blogger enumae said...

YOY = Year over year.
PQ = Versus previous quarter.

AMD

Q1 05 = 1.227 vs Q1 06 = 1.332

/+8% YOY/ -- /-28% PQ/

Q2 05 = 1.260 vs Q2 06 = 1.216

/-3% YOY/ -- /-9% PQ/

Q3 05 = 1.010 vs Q3 06 = 1.327

/+24% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 1.350 vs (Estimated) Q4 06 = 1.360

/+1% YOY/ -- /+3% PQ/

Intel

Q1 05 = 9.400 vs Q1 06 = 8.940

/-5% YOY/ -- /-14% PQ/

Q2 05 = 9.200 vs Q2 06 = 8.009

/-14% YOY/ -- /-11% PQ/

Q3 05 = 9.960 vs Q3 06 = 8.739

/-13% YOY/ -- /+9% PQ/

Q4 05 = 10.201 vs (Estimated) Q4 06 = 9.400

/-8% YOY/ -- /+7% PQ/

*Edited to show AMD without Spansion for the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2005*

4:17 PM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Jeach! said...

Hmm...and whats this I'm reading about AMD piling up inventory?!!?!?


I guess you've never heard of building inventory for product transition?

And I guess you've never heard of building inventory for process (65nm) transition?

No? It doesn't surprise me at all! "

Uhmmm - ok fangirl - wasn't it Sharidouche who stated "AMD was selling everything they could make"? Wasn't it the Pretender and his flunkies who were shouting out about how Intel was building up inventories and how that would contribute to them BK 2Q08?!?! Funny how it's OK if it's AMD who does this and not OK if it's Intel.

Oh yeah - and we're 6 weeks out from "launch" of the 65nm parts and there is exactly *0* places you can buy them. Including inside a Dell box.

Please go back to crying in your pillow along with Sharidouche. AMD had a shitty quarter and lead their investors on and now they're paying the price.

6:56 PM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Patty must be making a bunch of phone calls as the conversation seems to keep changing...

...just like Sharikou's "predictions"

7:29 PM, January 15, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judgement day is coming for Intel, I can't wait to see the MASSIVE OPERATING LOSSES as predicted by Sharikou. ;)

1:55 AM, January 16, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...


Funny how it's OK if it's AMD who does this and not OK if it's Intel.


Oh my god! Some people are serious idiots. No wonder they don't show their real names... I'd hide too!

There is a HUGE difference between stock piling legacy (old) crap while selling a new and better product!

AND...

Stock piling the same technology of different products! AMD underestimated sales in a product line so there is a small pile up there and then you have to make huge amounts of processors before transitioning.

Why do mines stock pile their ore outside of a mine instead of selling it all?

Why do oil companies run most wells at half-flow and keep inventory?

A healthy amount of inventory is ok! Intel has ALWAYS had inventory... just not huge amounts of old crap like it has now!!

12:43 PM, January 16, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judgement day is coming for Intel, I can't wait to see the MASSIVE OPERATING LOSSES as predicted by Sharikou. ;)

Oh errr. Yeah. Intel is in serious financial strife ;-)

Hell yeah! 9.7bn in revenue, 1.5bn in profit!

What happened to those "massive operational losses" we were promised Sharikou? I mean.. Intel's revenue was meant to be below 6bn.. AMD was supposed to have 55% of the market as you predicted! What's going on dude!?

1:38 PM, January 16, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A healthy amount of inventory is ok! Intel has ALWAYS had inventory... just not huge amounts of old crap like it has now!!"

It's actually not healthy when you are CAPACITY CONSTRAINED!

Also while you're analogies are absolutely financially marvellous... the price of oil and ore tend not to decline as rapidly microprocessors (at least I think I may have read that somewhere...)

Nice "financial" analysis...might want to stick to the lemonade stand in front of your yard...(Maybe you could stockpile the lemons!)

1:45 PM, January 16, 2007  
Anonymous edward said...

"New Egg as the FX-74 at 550.00
FX-72 450.00
And the FX-70 for just 309.99!!!!!

And I must add this, you said it was two 3800+ (at 1.8Ghz each) but its at 2.6GHz. Wooo!"


Actually, if you bought two FX-70 and downclock them to 1.8GHz, you'll be spending about $600 and get roughly two 3800+ with 60W (1.8^2/2.6^2 * 125) TDP each; if you're lucky it might actually be closer to 35W.

Sharikou might be off a bit but I think your "complaints" to his back-of-the-envelop asserts are much more rediculous.

1:59 PM, January 17, 2007  
Anonymous edward said...

"Rather funny how Intel's margins are going UP in a price war. Especially as they have:
1) Been running 300mm for some time and already ramped 65nm so there shouldn't be much cost savings on manufacturing side
2) Laid off a bunch of people resulting in a bunch of one time costs in Q3/Q4 (they have to pay all those severance packages)"


It's simple, but I guess some are too dumb to figure it out. Intel's ASP was up because 1) most PC buyers are dumb to pay more for the much advertised Conroe, while frankly K8 is the more cost-efficient choice; 2) Intel booked revenue from selling of its departments.

2:02 PM, January 17, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"2) Intel booked revenue from selling of its departments."

Uh, Edward, this revenue would not go into the ASP calculation, but you knew that already, right? Intel splits the revenue out between DEG, mobil and other. Sales from other departments would not go into DEG or mobile and not be factored into ASP...unless you think ASP = total revenue (regardless of source)/# of chips?

And if most consumers are too dumb and overpay for Core 2, how is AMD even dumber for not doing the same? Instead they've implemented a buy one get 1 free on their top of the line FX desktop chips (aka 4x4). If they are selling out every chip they make, how dumb are they for halving the price of their highest end desktop chip?

7:35 PM, January 17, 2007  
Anonymous edward said...

"Uh, Edward, this revenue would not go into the ASP calculation, but you knew that already, right?"

No I meant revenue, not ASP. If you read the comment that I responded you'd have known I used the wrong word... only if there was a way to edit the comment.

"And if most consumers are too dumb and overpay for Core 2, how is AMD even dumber for not doing the same?"

Because AMD only has one major design team, and it aims to make the most balanced product.

11:46 AM, January 18, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home