AMD and Fujitsu Spin Off Static Memory Giant

prostoalex writes "AMD and Fujitsu will form a new memory company. While corporations typically form new spinoffs every time you turn around, this one is different, claims ZDNet, since it looks like AMD will be splitting into two companies, one dealing in the microprocessor market, another in memory."

Comments

Siemens / Infinion

[Anonymous Coward]

How wonder what relationship this has with Siemens/Infinion. Siemens cooperates with Fujitsu and is very successful in the German market. And Infinion is a Siemens-spin-off that produces memory as well...

Bad News for Athlon?

[west]

Once the division is complete, the blood bath that is their processor division will become even more evident. How long before the shareholders demand that AMD leave a business that is throwing away their money (and always will) and concentrate on a business that actually makes money.

While the processor industry will be poorer for it, there's no reason why the shareholders should have to foot the bill just so we have competition that lowers Intel's prices and makes their processors faster.

Re:Bad News for Athlon?

[Natalie's Hot Grits]

"Firstly, the argument on politics is irrelevant as there are [some]democrats and [many]republicans in all my classes. Don't make yourself look even more stupid by denying basic economics and finance. Also, noone is an "expert" on the market. There are simply those of us who are more informed than others. And the parent poster was clearly an uninformed flamer. "

This is an argument about politics, read further to see why...

"I follow your reasoning, but it's really not relevant"

Ahh, but it is relevant to almost everyone. If people purchased stock to be owners of a company, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But in the real world, people purchase stock to risk their money and resell it later for profits, and expect their (larger, more important, greater investment)business partners to bend over backwards for their interests. They do this because thats the hot thing on the market, and its highly profitable, no matter who loses(as long as it isn't you, heh). This should be very relevant to you. My rebuttal to your main premise is what you consider irrelevant? So is it safe to assume your main premise in your origional post is also irrelevant? Maybe you need to think on this point some more...

"I can tell you what the "most important thing to a company is." It's to maximize shareholder wealth given some level of risk. PERIOD"

And here lies the answer to your politics.

You see, in the real world, a company is the officers, the board, the employees, and the company's assets. The stockholders are the employers/owners of said officers, board, employees, and assets. So what is the most important thing to the officers, the board, the employees, and the assets? Well, some might say it's to increase all of those things. Others say make profit. Others might say it is to gain marketshare. Others might think its about power. Still, others think its about making the world a better place for everyone, or a better place for the owner (Ex: non profit corporations), even more common, people will say it is to advance technology, or provide something that needs to be provided. Usually, it is a mixture of the above reasons.

My point is that you are missing the point. Selling stocks to the public is something that a company does to generate funding. Just like non-public companies get investment through more business partners. If that company wants to expand to something larger than they can afford (for reasons described above), they will open up to the public the ability for anybody to be a business partner(buy shares). Trading stocks to make profit because its hot on the market is SECONDARY TO ALL OF THIS. The fact that this is the most common reason for trading stocks (not on stock volume basis, but on stockholder numbers) does not change that it is SECONDARY, and not a primary concern of the people running the show (the company).

Companies are founded because the origional owners had an idea for a product or service that would be usefull. This is how technology advances in the real world. This is how people get jobs in the real world. And this is how people make money to put food on the table in the real world. As soon as you put profit as the number 1 priority in front of all of this, you are starting to miss the point of the whole fucking situation.

Corporations don't murder for profits, why not? Is it because its illegal, or because its greedy or immoral? If you answer the latter, then why is profit at all cost not immoral?

See, my point is that it IS a political debate. People like you approach the problem from a whole different perspective. One that is usually the least of the moral, and the most of the profitable.

I guess that is the difference between you and your party, and the rest of the world.

All this said, I offer a simple soluton to the problem. Maybe someone other than the business school should be teaching business majors ethics.

AMD / Fujitsu comments / info

[lingqi]

Well, I don't think AMD never had any experience with DRAM, and Fujitsu, though has, was never a big player (big ones are Micron, Samsung, and Infinion, Hynix is dying so they don't count anymore). (Slightly off-topic - in term of SRAM, SONY is a huge player - who would have thought they were a big semiconductor company as well as consumer electronics?)

Same time - few realize the tanglement between AMD and Fujitsu. They have been doing ventures together for a long time now - a few years back they put together a joint plant - it wasn't a great success as I remembered it, though

Did y'all know Fujitsu is *the* largest computer / IT stuff manufacture in Japan?

Lastly, AMD flash is going toward Mirror bit, while Intel is going toward multi-level storage. Honestly, intel version has more expandability (to a point - storing 1024 levels per cell is just impossible) - so we will see how that works out.

Just random stuff I had in mind when I read the article - thought people might find them useless but nontheless mildly interesting.

I personally wish them well, but I do wonder what would happen if they go into DRAM. They would either get slaughtered (lack of experience), or some DRAM manufactures would just go off and die (even more, for Hynix, or severely cripple, like NEC, Mitsubishi, etc who are small players in the DRAM area). DRAM market simply won't hold this many people (already seen so many consolidations as of the past).