Yeah, but what about what AMD's and nVidia's results showed? That AMD GPUs are barely selling at all?
21 out of 27 analysts covering AMD have it at either a hold or sell at present levels, so why would it do anything but stagnate. At best it's fairly valued at these low levels. At worst, overvalued. That means it can do one of two things. Stay flat or go down.
Put down the crack pipe. Please. Last week Sony announced over a billion dollars in losses and massive layoffs worldwide. It sold off its PC/laptop business and spun out the TV business, likely for liquidation as well. It is losing $40 to $50 per console it sells. Consoles alone represent more than $200 million in losses for Sony.
Sony is not a company that has resources with which to innovate and debut new products. Instead it is a lot like AMD. A company buried in debt, with almost no money for R&D and piles of money-losing products in all segments.
Just today AMD said that it won't have supply issues for the new GPUs worked out until the end of next quarter, leaving this quarter and most of the next to NVDA.
Game console sales have stalled. Big time. Sony is facing over a billion in losses and is selling off divisions and laying off staff. Nintendo teeters on the brink of bankruptcy as well. Microsoft can't give away XBox Ones. They are in-stock all over the place. The new CEO is considering dumping XBox One too, according to news today.
There is no money in console gaming. Developers make much more developing for mobile devices and for the PC and Mac. AMD makes virtually nothing on the chips - less than $15 per chip in income. Sony and Nintendo lose money on every console they sell. Microsoft kept the price high enough to break even, and can't sell any consoles as a result. It's a dead industry. You'll see it abandoned within the next 12 months by all players.
AMD has lost all of its market share in servers, desktops, tablets and notebooks to Intel. It has lost all of its market share in discrete GPUs to NVDA. It's console partners are all either looking to exit or go under. That leaves AMD with no real business for the balance of the year.
Watch for bankruptcy signs by the end of Q2.
They also missed their chance to dump for a $40 million gain on January 15th.
Investors are getting PO'ed.
Dummies, dummies, dummies.
I'll put it plainly in terms that a paramecium brain like you can understand. How much is Vanguard down on their quarter billion dollar investment as of today? They invested $250 million at $3.87. They were too stupid to sell when it hit $4.47. Now they are holding it at $3.69. They're down 5% and $11 million. Nuf said. They have no clue what they are doing and, just like you, will get bentoverandbuttrapedbyshorts come quarter end. Little retail turds like you don't have a monopoly on stupidity, son. You're both even dumber than plus_card.
This oft-discredited shill is still at it after having given terrible advice on AMD for several years now.
Hi latest hairbrain article argues that the focus on AMD's dwindling gross margins is misplaced. His pitch is to show that for the two quarters of pre-launch game console channel stuffing, though AMD's gross margins went in the toilet, its net margins actually improved.
This vile, self-abusing shill ignores two key facts. First, had AMD been able to maintain market share in higher gross margin segments and not replaced lost PC, laptop, server and tablet sales with low margin console chips sales over the last two quarters, its new margins would have been much higher than they were. Second, he completely skips the fact that AMD has guided for zero or worse net margins for the current quarter, and offered no guidance for Q2. That is, despite low margin console chips generating slightly positive net margins during the channel stuffing pre-launch quarters, those same low margin chips will fall into the same low demand doldrums as AMD's other chips until the 4th quarter, and this will lead to negative net margins much more severe than were suffered in the two quarters prior to availability of console chips and the shift in the business.
When AMD's net margins go negative for Q1 and it suffers staggering EPS losses, be sure to ask Luongo how it is that lousy gross margins are ever preferable to high gross margins.
The guy is the second biggest idiot in print, after sharikou.
Vanguard has bounced in and out of AMD many times over the last several years. Generally they've bought and sold at the wrong times. Bad speculators.
Dissociation. Q1 2014 will mark the irreversible dissociation of AMD on the one hand from NVDA and INTC on the other.
Here's how it is going down. The PC market has bottomed and stabilized. NVDA and INTC have such massive technology and quality leads on AMD in PCs, that their seizure of market share en-masse in professional and consumer graphics and server, notebook, tablet and desktop CPUs will accelerate materially. The cyclical, thin profitability and finite nature of the semi-custom gambit will become clear with a return to losses for AMD. Margins and cash will further erode, Q1 results will be dreadful and Q2 guidance, worse still, especially compared to rosy guidance from INTC and NVDA.
AMD's new path will be revealed to be not a "strategy" but rather a "complete rout" from all meaningful and essential markets by its competitors. I can't imagine Read will be able to keep his job after the first half.
AMD itself has forecast a 13-19% revenue decline in Q1. That translates to break-even or losses for the quarter, depending on where they come in on that range.
Your claims, therefore, are in direct conflict with AMD's own guidance.
Moreover, AMD is not a buyout candidate for reasons well-understood in the investment community. 80% of AMD's total revenues still come from sale of x86 chips. In order to be able to produce x86 chips, AMD must have a license from Intel. This license, which continually has new Intel x86 patents added to it, was discussed in the 2010 FTC consent decree. If AMD is acquired, the Intel patent license and the buyer's right to make use and sell x86 chips terminates after a standoff period, unless Intel decides to sell the buyer an new x86 license (probably not, but if so, figure multiple billions of dollars in additional money from the buyer).
Because AMD has no economic validity without Intel's x86 technology, and because a buyer who pays billions for AMD would then negotiate with Intel to learn whether it will either (a) lose 90% of AMD's revenue producing business because Intel refuses to grant a license or (b) have to pay additional unknown billions of dollars in order to retain 90% of AMD's revenue producing business, the possibility of a buyout involving AMD as a going concern (rather than a scavenger buying off non-x86 assets) is virtually ZERO.
You certainly are uninformed, making statements inconsistent with both AMD's own recent guidance and the publicly available change in control requirements of the Intel x86 license.
That makes you both a MORON and a FOOL.
It means that AMD is too lazy to set up a proper RSU program, and instead is using zero-dollar strike price options to funnel additional MBO-based compensation to executives. Typically the executive will receive an option grant of 3x $0 option shares, and immediately exercise and sell x $0 option shares. This is to raise cash to cover the taxes due (at ordinary income rates) on the options received.
The better question is this - given that since Read and his clutch of baboons have taken the helm, the share price has dropped from the 7s to the 3s, cash has dropped from $2 billion to $1 billion, margins have tumbled from the high 40s to the mid 30s, server market share has dropped to 4%, an all-time low for AMD, the company has been rocked with an inventory write-down of APUs, and related lawsuits against management for misstatements about APU demand preceding the write-down, etc. - why is management receiving bonus compensation of any kind at all?
Uh, when did this "run" start? AMD is down 45% since the middle of last year. It's been locked in a sustained downtrend for 6 months.
Agree about BK this year. Disagree that death will be slow. It will come swiftly. 9 months or less.
Never happen. Valve, like Sony and Microsoft, have no interest in supporting AMD's closed API. Steambox developers will already have to implement OpenGL and DirectX. By requiring yet another layer of graphics API implementation, Valve would stunt developer interest in writing for the platform.
Look at Mantle in the wild. The only developer who has actually ever shipped a title previously, who has also implemented Mantle in a commercially available game, is DICE. DICE is a tiny subsidiary studio to EA. EA and its scores of other studios have refused to adopt Mantle. DICE really had no choice because DICE actually co-wrote the spec with AMD. The handful of other studios that have announced support for mantle are unknowns. Start-ups that have NEVER EVER released a game title before.
Why do you suppose it is that of the thousands of well-established game development studios, only one has actually supported Mantle? No one wants to spend extra development cycles implementing a proprietary API that applies only to 16%-20% of the gaming graphics market. Time is money in game development and there is simple no ROI justifying catering to a tiny minority of the target gaming audience.
Witness NVDA's utter gaming dominance in the face of R9 and Mantle last quarter. Gamers ignore AMD and its promises. They buy NVDA. Because this is true, developers won't waste time developing for AMD-only graphics.
We'll see Mantle cancelled by year end. We'll see AMD's GPU market share drop to 10% by year end. We'll see AMD's x86 CPU and SoC market share drop to less than 15% by year end. We'll see its cash drop below $700 million by year end. We'll see $100 million or more in quarterly losses by year end. We'll see a sub-$1 share price by year end. These things I vow.
AMD drops another nickel on its relentless march to pennystockdom.
You were trying to make a point? Avoton already smashes AMD's Opteron ARM chip in SPEC server benchmarks. AMD's ARM chip won't sample until next month (Intel's 14nm is already sampling), and the ARM chip won't commercially ship until year end. When it does, it will be built on ancient, inefficient, costly 28nm dies. Intel's 22nm Avoton will have been replaced by its 14nm successor right on time, a full quarter before AMD's already noncompetitive ARM server chip sees first commercial shipment.
It would be like Baroush announcing today that at year end they'll have the ultimate horse drawn carriage ready after being out of the personal transport market for 200 years, and then comparing it in acceleration, top speed and lateral acceleration to the new Ghibli. Pointless. AMD's strategies are ridiculous. 2014 is definitely the last year for an intact AMD.
That would be stupid with the K1 now sampling. Tegra's future depends on whether K1 manages to boot QCOM out of Kindle, Galaxy Tab and and Nexus. If so, you;ll see Tegra fortunes reverse 180 degrees and go back to where they were before QCOM displaced NVDA during the last Android tablet refresh cycle.
You AMD pumptards should know a whole lot about displacement. Recall that NVDA replaced AMD GPUs in two out of three Apple product lines during the most recent OS X platform refresh cycle. NVDA snatched the high volume, high margin opportunities. AMD retained only the tiny volume line. Apple says AMD drivers and support suck. The only reason Apple kept AMD GPUs in the Mac Pro line is cost. Its margins are tiny due to costly US manufacture and Intel's refusal to discount Xeons, which are must haves since AMD server CPUs are such total garbage. NVDA is selling out of Quadras at full price and wouldn't sell cheaply to Apple. You noticed NVDA's record professional graphics revenues last quarter, right?
Lastly, the Tegra assets are core to NVDA's latest push into the multi-billion dollar automotive electronics industry. Tegra already runs Tesla infortainment systems and car makers are now lined up to get Tegra in their dashboards.
AMD in contrast has nothing. Console chip sales are dead through Q3 of this year. Graphics chips sales are in retreat in all segments, consumer and professional. NVDA has a GPU refresh in Q2, which will accelerate AMD's GPU market share losses. In CPUs and SoCs for servers, laptops, netbooks, tablets and desktops, Intel is CRUSHING AMD's cheesy crippled Bulldozer derivatives.
In Q1 AMD will miss by a country mile. You'll get to enjoy sub-$1share prices this year. Pucker up pumpster.
Intel does have a monopoly. As does NVDA. Both companies have sufficient market share in their respective markets - x86 microprocessors in Intel's case and GPUs in NVDA's case - to have monopoly power. You don't need 100% market share to be considered a monopoly. Anything over about 60-65% is generally sufficient.
But there's nothing illegal about having a monopoly. In fact amassing dominant market share is the duty of every management team of every company. In other words, acquisition of monopoly power is the sole reason of existence of every commercial enterprise. Only the use of illegal means in acquiring monopoly power is regulated. In AMD's case, both Intel and NVDA acquired their respective monopolies the old fashioned way - by beating AMD bloody in the market place with vastly superior products and technologies.
AMD makes promises. Intel and NVDA make class-leading products. No one but a fantard buys promises. The non-existent AMD market share is ample evidence of that fact.