AMD To Close Plants, Lay off 2300, Lose Gateway
cdrudge writes: "According to this article on CNN, AMD will be closing 2 plants in Austin, TX and also their operations in Penang, Malaysia due to slack demand. 2300 jobs will be cut in the process. The same article mentions Gateway dropping it's 'Select' line of computers. Their 'Select' line of computers were Gateway's only AMD-based systems. A Gateway spokesperson said 'We're consolidating all of our offering behind Intel, which was the biggest part of our mix already.'"
Here's a quote that stands out in the article:
Separately, embattled PC maker Gateway (GTW: down $0.10 to $6.07, Research, Estimates) said Tuesday it will phase out all of its systems based on AMD processors as part of its broader cost-cutting efforts.
It's cheaper for them to just source Intel CPU's and motherboards than to run two product lines, basically. I'm stunned that the price difference in the CPU alone wouldn't be enough to keep Gateway using AMD, but there you have it. For once, Intel is a cheaper decision.
What's your damage, Heather?
'We're consolidating all of our offering behind Intel, which was the biggest part of our mix already.'
So, because consumer spending is down, Gateway is discontinuing its' discount line of computers. Because consumers want to buy more expensive computers when the economy is in trouble.
I must be missing something.
While the price war has left scars on each company, AMD's wounds have been more severe than its larger, deep-pocketed rival.
Now is the time for Intel to use all of its' financial muscle to crush AMD once and for all. This is capitalism. If Intel can continue bleeding longer by slashing prices below manufacturer cost, AMD will eventually run out of money. Once the economy picks back up, Intel will look out on the sunny pasture of monopoly, where it can play in peace with Microsoft now that the U.S. government has said "OK" to monopolies.
My advice: buy Intel stock.
Yes, I heard AMD was going to close 2 fabs, and take a $100 million charge against earnings. I also heard it'd save $125 million a year doing it. Getting your money back in ten months isn't a bad thing.
As for Gateway, most of the people who buy them are the ones who are charmed by the sexy "Intel Inside" logo. Those of us who know better don't buy from Gateway anyway.
I will continue to purchase and recommend AMD products for my customers. Just because Gateway is leaving them behind doesn't mean the rest of the world should too. Buy what you think is best, and what you can trust.
I remember when Bush kept talking about our economy being on the path to a recession several months ago. It sent chills down my spine everytime he said it. What kept the boom economy of the 90's going was what Alan Greenspan called "Irrational Exuberance" - people where so confident in the economy that they invested more than any economic indicator would have shown.
...
But now, if we start talking about out economy in a negative manner, we're settings us up for "Irrational Fear," where people think the economy is worse than it really is and pull lots of money out. Just the word recession can get stock holders antsy.
One of the main reasons that several business are now having problems is that a lot of people are holding onto more of their money instead of spending it and putting these people to work. Recession -> hold onto money -> more job cuts -> more recession -> hold onto more money ->
I don't have to remind programmers what happens to their apps when they get stuck in infinite loops...
F-bacher
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
Yes, the extra $400 is worth it to let you forget to install the heatsink.
Granted the thermal protection is a pretty major oversight on AMDs part, but it's not the killer feature in my book. I consider low cost and performance to be the killer features of a processor.
My advice: Install a good heatsink correctly the first time and pocket the difference.
I read the internet for the articles.
The market is always right.
By what standard do you judge that the market is always right? Do you mean it literally? Do you mean it in theory? Do you mean it in practice?
Do you consider the fact that people buy things because they are told to do so by the manufacturer? That the only time a manufacturer needs to consider closing a factory is when they cannot successfully convince people to buy whatever that factory produces?
Are you saying "the market wants more Nikes, therefore it is right that more Nikes be produced and sold"?
I have a difficult time believing that the "market" desire for more Nikes is "right" in any meaningful way.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Go ahead, mod me down. I've got plenty of karma points to burn.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat