Not when nobody would buy it. Writing off the bad parts, then satisfying the debt, would leave an acquirer with a GPU company that just proved it can't take a technological lead even when introducing a newly integrated technology.
The upside for longs on an acquisition is about a dollar. The upside for shorts on a BK is over two dollars.
And, as I've already pointed out, when the CEO of saying not to expect any improvement for five years, that is absolute proof that she is not trying to make the company look valuable to potential buyers, which tells us there are none, yet is a violation of her duty to shareholders whether there are any potential buyers or not.
So you can expect another shareholder suit. AMD is being run by people who have no idea what their jobs entail, and it is costing shareholders money. But it's good for shorts.
I will never have to cover.
No, it started Microsoft had talked to AMD months ago. Which is non-informative, since Microsoft is in business with AMD and has meetings with them because of business.
Your conspiracy theories about AMD are also nonsense. The share trades were institutional negotiated trades, and 40k short-term OTM calls are a cheap gamble for someone who thinks that volatility is up.
Microsoft buying AMD to save the margin on gaming console chips makes no more sense than Microsoft buying an asphalt company to save a few dollars on parking lot resurfacing.
But do keep up the comedy show.
Microsoft can get its operating system on any device it wants.
And it hasn't had a monopoly in operating systems, ever. It hasn't even had a 1:1 relationship with x86 computers since Unix was ported to the 386 in the 80s.
It was accused of bundling, by the EU, when to used custom hooks in the OS that other browsers couldn't access. If Microsoft bought AMD to restrict access to AMD hardware, it would just get slapped with a similar suit. So monopolism is a reason Microsoft will never buy AMD.
This whole thread is ridiculous pumper trolling.
Intel would deny Microsoft the rights to the IP, and there's nothing anyone could do about it.
According to the rumor citing an unidentifiable "source", Microsoft talked to AMD "months ago".
This week, Lisa Su is talking about taking 5 years to show any results to shareholders.
You of course are too stupid to do the math on that, but it's clear that Lisa Su is not trying to get value for shareholders in an acquisition. If any acquirer came forward now, Su would be sued until there's nothing left but her khakis.
AMD is not being sold. AMD is going bankrupt and nobody is going to stop it.
You're too stupid to be short AMD. Have fun pouring your life savings into a dead rumor.
She's paid in options. The common practice with options paid in your compensation package is to sell a portion of them to cover the grant price so you don't have to pay it out of cash. If you see a good list of insider transactions you will see paired acquisitions and dispositions, with the disposition being a fraction of the acquisition.
But if you see unpaired plain sales or purchases, you may be looking at actual insider trades. Sales of those are sometimes scheduled and automatic. Other sales are generally done to obtain cash to pursue other activities. So insider sales are of little information value.
Insider purchases, however, are always interesting. Lisa Su's ~200K purchase of shares just a few weeks before she inked the sale of the company's final piece of real estate (its HQ) is probably taking up a whole file cabinet at the SEC's investigative offices, for example.
She is, however, dead solid perfect in the continuing string of self-paying incompetents who've convinced this company's doddering board of directors to clothespin her to the spokes of their hoverounds.
"we’re in an industry that takes three to five years to really fully evaluate - you’re not going to know whether I’ve done a good job until five years from [now]."
Bullpucky. Anyone with any experience in this industry can see a winning or losing strategy the day it's first put on a powerpoint.
There are only two interpretations that fit Su's comment:
1. She is running the long con, and wants "investors" to sucker themselves by not paying attention to all the negatives about this company.
2. She has no idea, at all, what she is doing.
If you aren't innately fearful, uncertain, and doubtful about AMD, then you're #$%$ on the people who are saving your skin.
They close entire divisions of "other stuff" and spend a year's costs on severance and disposal expenses on them, too.
GPUs selling out is an indication of supply constraint rather than high demand.
AMD is having difficulty making these things.
AMD is losing revenue to inefficiency.
Bad management + bad yield = no profits coming.
Q2 will be a disaster.