Slashdot Mirror

$2B in debt, $1B cash, lost $600M last year, sales dropped 30% last year. They have no assets (spun off their manufacturing facilities). If the next gen consoles do not sell well because of casual / tablet gaming and potential Apple TV games, AMD will be bankrupt in one year and shuttering in two. Spending money on open source drivers is a long term investment - it's not going to get them an additional $600M in revenue next year (>2M additional graphics cards or >5M systemic wins) when PC sales are on the decline.

Right and within 1 year the number of GPGPUs sold via their custom APUs inside Consoles with be 6:1 to 10:1 of your sales. They are in the new Wii, PS4 and XBox. They're expanding their small-to-mid-tier server footprint [beginning to own that space] and with more and more laptops using AMD APUs will begin to own that space. Their partnership with ARM will make them an attractive provider for future Smart TVs, and other embedded products not even yet projected out. AMD is going to be in the black very shortly.

http://www.istockanalyst.com/finance/story/6474155/3-v-checking-fbr-capital-markets-5-50-advanced-micro-devices-inc-amd-price-target ``Later in the report, Rolland added, `Whereas four months ago many investors were questioning AMD as an ongoing entity, today, we believe financial stability has been secured by next-gen gaming APU wins, with potential upside driven by new initiatives like SeaMicro. While AMD's recent woes remain fresh in mind, the business looks as though it has stabilized for now, and cash levels should remain sufficient for the near future.'

Obviously, investors are attracted by the possibility of a 35.8% return within a 12 month timeframe. If Rolland is correct, that's sort of like having your own ATM. Let's examine Advanced Micro Devices' five-year history for price-to-book (P/B), price-to-sales (P/S), and trailing price-to-earnings (P/E) to see if the analyst's price-tag is realistic.

While we have this AMD conversation, the street values the company at 6.98 times its book value; whereas, competitor Intel Corporation (INTC) trades with a P/B value of 2.34. To get to $5.50 based on the current book value of $0.58 per share, AMD would trade at 9.48 times book, well above the five year average of 4.78, but below the max of 17.06.

Since Wall Street expects AMD to lose $0.25 per share in 2013, we'll have to work with 2014's consensus profit estimate of $0.04 for our P/E analysis. A price-target of $5.50 requires a P/E of 137.5; whew, feeling a little light headed from the high altitude. How about you? It is dizzying as AMD's highest P/E in the last five-years has been 22.07. Five-fifty seems to be a little out-of-reach based on P/E. "

Just from some quick Googling:

100% perfect trading streak

61-day perfect run

There are some in-depth analyses of the "Flash Crash" recently, for instance at:

Flash Crash Analysis

Energy is already cheaper than it has ever been in human history, and we are destroying more topsoil, not less. That's because, no matter how cheap energy becomes, it's still cheaper to destroy the topsoil than to produce by other means.

The more topsoil you destroy, the lower your crop yields. The lower your crop yields, the lower your return on investment on farming. The lower your ROI on farming, the higher the ROI on buying topsoil (or fertilizer, or whatever) from the guy who can dig the fertilizer out of the ground, or the guy who can use the energy from the nuclear power plant who can synthesize it out of thin air. The less food there is, and the more people there are, the more valuable food becomes.

Sure, the rumors came out in 2009. Now the only question his whether it's BHP or someone else who buys Potash, Inc.

Given sufficient time, markets self-correct. Population/demographic trends are trends that take decades to play out. More than enough time for even the slowest market to react, and that's why (despite the crashes of 1929 and 2008) Malthus. Was. Still. Wrong.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-26/davos-too-big-to-fail-as-bankers-recoil-in-political-backlash.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/business/economy/26big.html NY Times

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124528373595925623.html WSJ 2009 before the crash

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-oew-ikenson-wial4-2009jun04,0,4807351.story June '09 before the crash

Forgive the formatting, but it's Saturday AM and I went drinking with my sons yesterday.

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

I was at CTIA this year looking for Wimax enabled devices and release schedules, here are some relevant links from people I saw on the show floor:

http://www.runcom.com/sitefiles/1/3310/19046.asp

Go to the part about Wimax Phones. There are also Wimax video IP phones and wimax based surveillance systems shown there, see a product announcement here from Feb.

https://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/3042555

I don't see details on their site, but the handset I have a flyer for was called the Sting, and was dual mode Wimax/GSM.

Also saw one called the wiofone: http://www.wimax.com/commentary/blog/blog-2008/wimax-blog-wimax-desktop-phone

Placeholder website here: http://wioline.com/

Samsung was also present displaying a number of devices with embedded Wimax chipsets in them, intended to use VoIP as part of the connectivity, such as the PDA (SCH-M830 and M8200), an UMPC or 2 (all of which were Windows based devices), and some standard laptops with wimax chipsets in them.

It's a chicken-and-egg problem still, since the devices will become more common when there's more coverage, more markets, and more possible subscribers, but people will fund the growth of the network when there are devices available which use it. It seems pretty obvious from investments that Intel/Motorola et al are both trying hard to lock in a future where many devices will have embedded wimax chipsets simply included as bluetooth and wifi chipsets are today. And not just laptops, but cars, washing machines, refrigerators, anything that would benefit from network access.

Carrying the rest of the country economically? bullshit

Economist Bernard "Bud" Weinstein probably would agree. He says "North Texas Best Place to Be in Recession". Now if I recall right, from threads yesterday and the day before we've conversed in, you think Obama is doing the right thing. Well so does "Bud". He "believes the steps are headed in the right direction." Further, "He believes North Texas will fare better than most of the country, as the area's economy was strong as it headed into the global recession. People already were reported to be flocking to the region from all over the United States, especially from California and Michigan, with the surge expected to increase once the economy improves later this year or in early 2010."

Now I don't agree, or disagree, but your bullshit statement caused me to look it up so I found that article.

Middle ranking? is 49th a middle ranking as that was the last ranking I heard for Texas [last few years]

You're still right, Texas is near the bottom in education. However New Hampshire, the state for the libertarian Free State Project, is ranked number 1 by at least one calculation. It looks like New Hampshire high school students also score higher on the SAT than average.

Libertarians and Republicans might have their differences but they tend to vote together, are cut from the same cloth

I started out as a democrat, though not registered. The first tyme I voted I voted for Jimmy Carter. I don't recall who I voted for in '84 but then in '88 I voted for Ron Paul on the Libertarian ticket. During the 2004 campaign there were some Libertarians for Howard Dean. And in 2008 there was a debate on who would be better, or less bad, McCain or Obama. I think I told you before, but I may be wrong, I voted for Obama myself. So while the Libertarian Party was started by people who left the Republican Party not all are or vote for Republicans.

My problem with Texas is that a whole bunch of stupid radiates from that state every year and is mucking up the country I live in and Love.

I sometimes feel the same about both Democrats and Republicans.

Falcon

Yes, because buying things over the phone or in store will never result in a breach.

Oh, wait...

Those three stood out in my mind since we were affected by all of them. There are others, I'm sure. In the first two cases, our credit card information was compromised despite the fact that we shopped in-store and not online. In the third case, our information was compromised at the processor level, so it really didn't matter where we shopped. Face it, no matter where you shop, your information is in the hands of other companies and can/will get compromised. The only way to prevent this is to only shop using cash. (Something that is becoming an impossibility more and more.)

> I've been in fifteen years and still only get to oversee Botswana.
> --
> Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.

I guess that explains your sig then.

(p.s. this is the best I could find)
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2470527&title=Bank_of_Botswana_Says.html