AMD Interview: EU Ruling on Intel

dmcowen674 · **Joined:** Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:30 am **Posts:** 4955

In a landmark ruling by the European Commission today, Intel was found guilty of antitrust violations and was fined 1.06 billion Euros (US$1.44 billion). Intel was also ordered to stop its illegal practices which include paying PC manufacturers to delay or cancel altogether production of AMD-based PCs and improper rebate practices as a reward for using Intel CPUs.

Intel continues to deny any wrongdoing even though this is the third conviction they’ve been hit with regarding antitrust behavior. "Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes. "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."

Given their convictions in Japan in 2005 and South Korea in 2008 this third conviction seems to set a trend. As the global economic downturn continues its march across the wallets of consumers, this ruling enforcing fair competition couldn’t have come at a better time.

While consumers are certainly on the top of the list of winning parties, AMD is the company that will be leading the charge, or lack thereof, by now being allowed to compete in a fair marketplace. As is the historical norm between these two, it will be AMD that drives the market to additional savings for consumers.

[caption id="attachment_6751" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Nigel Dessau"] 45337a-web_nigel_dessau

[/caption]

Nigel Dessau, Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer has joined us today to offer some additional insight from AMD’s point of view on how today’s ruling will affect AMD’s business moving forward. Nigel is responsible for AMD’s global marketing, image and campaign strategy.

Thanks very much, Nigel, for taking time out to answer some questions today. I’m sure your phone is ringing off the hook.

AlienBabelTech: The EU ruling against Intel carries a 1.04B Euro fine with it. What happens with this money? Is it paid out class-action style to consumers and businesses that purchased Intel CPUs, entered into the EU general fund and/or will AMD be awarded any of it?

Nigel Dessau: The EC will determine what happens with the money as is typical for this type of action. Frankly we’re more concerned that Intel stops doing what it’s not supposed to be doing so we can get on with the business of having a free and open market place.

AlienBabelTech: Obviously AMD will be better able to increase their market share with the reduction of Intel’s ability to illegally inhibit competition. How prepared is AMD for increased production and how soon should we expect to see AMD’s market share increase?

Nigel Dessau: The process we’ve gone through with Global Foundry was designed to do exactly that, allow us to better respond to demand. We are fully prepared to meet an increase in demand with a corresponding increase in production.

AlienBabelTech: What are the top three action items for AMD to execute on related to this ruling?

Nigel Dessau: The first thing to do is talk to OEM, ODM and retail partners to make sure they know what Intel was doing is illegal and that they are now free to engage with us based on demand and a normal business model. They have been a victim of Intel monopolistic practices as much as AMD.

Next would be to double down on the Delaware case that is ongoing. If your next door neighbor has been the victim of a crime, it’s still a crime even though it wasn’t your house that was broken into. We have the same kind of activities going on in the US that have yet to be addressed.

Finally we need to keep innovating. We want to drive to a 50% market share as one would expect in a standard duopoly and with each anti-trust ruling against Intel we come one step closer to having the opportunity to achieve that.

AlienBabelTech: What impact might this have on business in the US and other parts of the world?

Nigel Dessau: More and more markets have moved to a position where the consumer has the power to dictate when, where and how much [as that applies] to their goods and services. We are finally seeing that achievement happen in the tech industry as well. MediaMarkt was paid to delay or not carry at all AMD-based PCs that there was no option at all for consumers to purchase at all. This ruling will allow consumers the ability to make their own choices about what they buy rather than allowing one company to dictate what is available.

AlienBabelTech: Finally, what impact is this ruling having on general moral at AMD? If I were to walk down the halls would I be ducking party favors and hearing people sing Auld Lang Syne or is there just a quiet sense of the calm before the storm as AMD sales worldwide redouble their efforts?

Nigel Dessau: This is definitely a checkmark in the win column for us and it certainly feels good to have other people know what we know. There is an air of excitement internally that we now have a chance to take AMD to a place it’s never been before. The football is on the ground and now it’s up to us to kick it in the right direction.

Nigel thanks so much for taking the time to give us AMD’s point of view on this. We wish you and AMD all the luck and look forward to seeing what you come up with next.

For more information about Nigel and to see his thoughts on other topics, visit his blog at http://blogs.amd.com/nigeldessau/.

Please join us in our Forums

Follow us on Twitter

For the latest updates from ABT, please join our RSS News Feed

Join our Distributed Computing teams

Folding@Home - Team AlienBabelTech - 164304

SETI@Home - Team AlienBabelTech - 138705

World Community Grid - Team AlienBabelTech

apoppin · Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 9:41 pm

How about reading our OWN site for a change?

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=6744

AMD Interview: EU Ruling on Intel

our first exclusive INTERVIEW with AMD's VP and Chief marketing officer !!
.. we are sending out press releases on it

:yahoo:

MrK · **Joined:** Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:08 pm **Posts:** 1674

haha lol, yeah dave.

apoppin · Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 10:44 pm

to be fair, he works late nights and gets up in the late afternoon
- this was big news and he saw it first - before my mass emailing

i am glad we agree on the story
:grin:

are you able to *merge* this topic with the one off the front page so it is in recent news?

apoppin · Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 9:27 pm

thanks, Mr Admin!
- most appreciated merging the topics

You have GOT to realize that this story gives me mixed feelings. i have been an Intel supporter since the beginning. i have NEVER had an AMD system until i got my notebook last month - tested many; built them for friends and relatives - but never for my "own" system :blush:

However, this is 3 strikes breaking the law in a HORRIFIC manner. Conspiracy to the max that is clearly defined by Fair court systems today.

For the last 8 years the Bush Administration, the Justice Department did not file a single case against a dominant firm for violating the anti-monopoly law.
- that is WHY our economy is a disaster - because these mega corps become predatory - if they were not already

Obama's administration signaled a HUGE shift away from this and i expect Intel to be slapped with even a BIGGER fine
- i believe Obama wants to make an "example" out of intel.

i still like their product .. but now i want to see what happens now .. when AMD can no longer use "unfair" as an EXCUSE

LeonHyman · Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 9:33 pm

True words Mark.

I share the sentiment/status about being an Intel supporter.
However, I buy whatever works best.
Therefore, when AMD no longer has "unfair" as an EXCUSE and put out a CPU that will clock-for-clock beat Intel....I will buy their product...simple.

I refuse to be a fanboy of any nature. Yes, I have preferences but then again who doesn't.
I am also partial to Nvidia but I VERY HAPPILY run an ATI 4870 right now so.....that should be proof enough.

Rollo · **Joined:** Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:22 pm **Posts:** 743

apoppin wrote:

thanks, Mr Admin!
- most appreciated merging the topics

You have GOT to realize that this story gives me mixed feelings. i have been an Intel supporter since the beginning. i have NEVER had an AMD system until i got my notebook last month - tested many; built them for friends and relatives - but never for my "own" system :blush:

However, this is 3 strikes breaking the law in a HORRIFIC manner. Conspiracy to the max that is clearly defined by Fair court systems today.

For the last 8 years the Bush Administration, the Justice Department did not file a single case against a dominant firm for violating the anti-monopoly law.
- that is WHY our economy is a disaster - because these mega corps become predatory - if they were not already

Obama's administration signaled a HUGE shift away from this and i expect Intel to be slapped with even a BIGGER fine
- i believe Obama wants to make an "example" out of intel.

i still like their product .. but now i want to see what happens now .. when AMD can no longer use "unfair" as an EXCUSE

LOL

1. Obama has no control of the court system, nor should he. He can appoint Supreme Court judges not deal out justice.

2. Although people on forums like to make a big deal out of things like this, in the grand scheme of things, this won't matter at all. Yep, send yourselves an appointment- in one year, AMD will still be in the basement of marketshare and limping along. Know why? a. AMDs problems with marketshare have more to do with buyer perception of their products, and performance b. Not like these fines will cripple Intel- they have the money. They will just lower the price on their superior products instead of giving the money back to vendors in rebates, and keep forcing AMD to sell for change.

3. I can remember when half the computers in the Best Buy ads had "AMD inside" on them in their era of having the best parts. The best market share they had then, even with superior products, was around 25% IIRC. They enjoy no such advantage in performnance these days, and are still living down the stigma of the Phenom launch and years of Core2 total domination.

So get all misty eyed about the victory of the little guy if you want Apoppin, but money talks, bullshit walks, and a fine Intel can pay won't make many people buy 3 core chips, or slower 2 and 4 core chips. "Intel Inside" is what the world trusts, and for good reason most of the time.

apoppin · Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 10:11 am

It sounds like you need facts instead of FUD, again ,,, so let me set you straight

Obama may not "control" the court system but he sure does influence it - beyond any RRR's worst nightmare

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/busin ... ust&st=cse

Quote:

President Obama’s top antitrust official announced on Monday that the administration would restore an aggressive enforcement policy against corporations that use their market dominance to elbow out competitors or to keep them from gaining market share.

The new enforcement policy reverses the Bush administration’s approach, which strongly favored defendants against antitrust claims. It returns to a policy that led to the landmark antitrust lawsuits against Microsoft . . .

The administration is hoping to encourage smaller companies in an array of industries to bring their complaints to the Justice Department about potentially improper business practices by their larger rivals. Some of the biggest antitrust cases were initiated by complaints taken to the Justice Department.

The announcement is aimed at making sure that no court or party to a lawsuit can cite the Bush administration policy as the government’s official view in any pending cases. Ms. Varney warned judges and litigants in antitrust lawsuits not involving the government to ignore the Bush administration’s policies, which were formally outlined in a report by the Justice Department last year.

The report applied legal standards that made it difficult to bring new cases involving monopoly and predatory practices.

As a result of the Bush administration’s interpretation of antitrust laws, the enforcement pipeline for major monopoly cases — which can take years for prosecutors to develop — is thin. During the Bush administration, the Justice Department did not file a single case against a dominant firm for violating the antimonopoly law.

Many smaller companies complaining of abusive practices by their larger rivals were so frustrated by the Bush administration’s antitrust policy that they went to the European Commission and to Asian authorities.

Now it appears i have to explain this to you - times are a'changin :tease:

- i expect a fine to be levied against intel to make the European one look like "Chump change" - - Intel Inside is about to get it's other eye blackened

the Failed Administration that encouraged Corporate Abuse is gone; intel is living in a new Era for at least another 7-3/4 years
- you will also need to get used it .. and AMD being allowed to fairly compete - for the FIRST time
:grin:

Rollo · **Joined:** Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:22 pm **Posts:** 743

LOL some more.

First they'll have to prove wrong doing, but second, no one buys AMD parts. Obama would have to put Intel out of business.

People don't want AMDs parts- that is why they are failing, not because people had no access to their goods. That has always been the case, and it's largely because for every generation but one their parts are second class.

For a lot of those generations the motherboards were just flakey.

Anyway- no point arguing it. I get really weary of fanATics talking about what ATi is "gonna do" and what AMD is "gonna do".

It never seems to quite pan out the way ATi/AMD/fanATics envision it, and it's always somebody else's fault. (the evil NVIDIA/Intel marketing machine, unfair practices)

I remember some doofus on Rage3d blathering at me "It's called Barcel-OWNA!" and other doofuses yammering about how ATi would get dominant market share with the "triumphant 4800 series".

And here we are- AMD shipping 20%, ATi shipping 33%. No shift of market, no revolution, products came and went and nobody cared. Intel and NVIDIA just lowered their prices and the dominant companies extended their dominance.

So unless Obama is going to overthrow capitalism and not allow big companies to compete on price, things will likely stay the same. :good:

AMD Interview: EU Ruling on Intel

Who is online