The FBR Capital upgrade in which they hyped micro-servers didn't work, so Bloomberg was hired to spread this. Connect the dots.
Once I get the green-light from TMF (which has a trading/disclosure policy) to go short ARMH, I plan to do so.
I don't doubt that, and I largely agree with you that the "rubber stamp" business model is a great one. I like ARM the company, but I don't like ARM the stock at $50.
Lucky. I am restricted from trading ARMH until Monday. Guess I'll have to just let this one go (unless the stock stays elevated on Monday).
Absolutely spot on. The doubt is now seeded and it will be an overhang until Intel starts kicking it into overdrive on its financials.
Intel is doing semi-custom and touted it all through Renee James' presentation. Congratulations, you've earned your fellow "AMD fans" a nice article explaining just why this is NOT a benefit for AMD.
And it'll make much more sense than anything the AMD pumpers have ever said.
"TSMC is currently using its 20nm process technology (20SOC) for small-quantity production and will start using the subsequent 16nm process technology for small-quantity production soon. With the 16nm process technology, the company has already prototyped SRAM, a ring oscillator and test chip equipped with ARM Ltd's "Cortex-A57" processor core. In the lecture, it explained the details of the process technology, transistor characteristics, prototyped SRAM, etc."
Wow. So they're pretty far behind Intel in both time to market AND performance/density of 16nm? Tsk-tsk. Intel has shown Broadwell (a complex MPU design) running Windows and killing it on power and performance. TSMC has some A57 "test chips" ;-)
Didn't Intel say it had 10nm "test chips" now? Are they in "risk production"?
Frankly, I just think you're incredibly ignorant.
The "semi-custom" at AMD involves either using stock AMD cores or stock ARM cores and then building a customized SoC around it.What's the difference between that and Intel building a custom SoC for a big customer around an Atom or Core CPU core?
You AMD pumpers are clueless.
"Communication is a big market and QCOM has been ripping that market off. They will welcome INTC into that space."
Indeed. The market is hungry for a second source for modem, and with XMM 7260 in 1H 2014, they will finally have it.
" 16nm will not be competitive because of density."
It also won't be competitive on a per-transistor basis on performance. TSMC's 16nm transistors have similar performance characteristics to INTC 22nm. Intel will be a full generation ahead on performance, too at 14nm.
"Everyone hates INTC because they are so good and have the potential to dominate their segment."
Yes. Ever since INTC eviscerated AMD. There was a time when INTC was behind just like it is today on both PC processors and especially server processors...Intel struck back in PCs with Conroe in 2006 and in severs in 2008 with Nehalem. The rest is history.
". All this whining about SOC design is a diversion. That is a temporary learning curve issue"
The only complaint is that Intel really could have moved quicker. No doubts they get there in time, but waiting for Broxton (mid-2015) will be a frustrating exercise.
" Look for big gains in the near future."
Hope you're right since I'm expecting that for 2015.
I'm starting to like you.
"Where is the gain for Intel Shareholders looking at history unless they shorted AMD?"
Absolutely correct. But you have to remember that back in 2006, INTC was trading at a rather rich multiple, while today INTC's multiple is severely compressed because PCs matured and, frankly, Intel missed out on two of the biggest secular growth trends in chips.
That being said, at this point, INTC is priced for perpetual EPS decline. If the company can stop the bleeding and even creep upwards in 2014, then in 2015 it can make a really big "bang". Intel's Atom division will lose about $3B ($0.60/share) next year, so if PCs are stable, servers keep growing, and comms/apps processors for phones and tablets grow enough in volume to wipe out the operating loss, then INTC will see meaningfully higher EPS. Even at a constant multiple of ~13x or so, if Intel is earning $1.89 + $0.60 = $2.49/share, it is a $33 stock.
Heaven forbid, if PCs return to low single digit growth after this "bottoming out", severs grow at a ~15% CAGR as promised (with operating profit growing faster than revenues as per analyst day), and Intel is gaining share in a rapidly growing mobile market, then I don't see $3/share in EPS as unreasonable. At a 12x multiple, this implies a share price of $36, and at a 13x multiple this is a $39 stock.
There's very real upside potential to be had here once the operating leverage in Other IA kicks in and once PCs bottom out and return to mild growth.
I know you like numbers, so here's my breakeven point for Other IA.
$3B operating loss on $4B in sales. Assuming GM of 50% (to be conservative I am BELOW corporate average here), we get opex of $5B. Assuming also that this business scales nicely (i.e. most of the spending needed is in place, just need the products to roll out), this would imply that at 50% GM we need ~$6B in sales to roughly breakeven.
I do not believe that it is inconceivable for Intel to get to $6B in 50% GM sales (no BOM issue with Broxton, full ramp of LTE modems, etc.). The smartphone apps processor + modem market is ~$40B and the tablet chip market will be about $5-$6B by 2015.
Plenty of room for Intel to grow profitably.