|Bought a few at $6.91 about 14.30 today. Crawling up, so far at just over $7.|
|AMD below $7, gonna have a flutter on it. Any opinions?|
|The epic is AND ... http://www.advfn.com/cmn/fundamentals.php3?epic=AND|
|Andaman resources has been an empty cash shell since 1997 or 1998 I believe.
It is doing a deal with an OFEX company GALLEON Holdings ( formerly synthetic dimensions ) on a 50 AND shares for 1 GAL share which is due for completion on 23rd November, ANDAMAN will then be renamed GALLEON PLC. And is also now actively looking for other deals.
I'll end up with 250,000 new shares...... I don't know much else about this deal but I'll be glad to be clear of untradable OFEX shares.....
Any cash shell boffins out there know whats going on ?|
|Mad MAc, I think the charting point covers what I've been getting at in my rambling - both shares are a buy, but the market supports Intel more than AMD, maybe because of the number of false dawns for AMD in the past. So AMD is the bigger gamble, even if, & I do believe this is the case, they have guaranteed revenue flows and will make a mint out of flash for the next year or so.
Intel did not miss out on the bull market last year (the share price went up from a post-split $25 to $70), but it has weathered the retreat from techs very well because it is not just a tech stock so much as an institution. Also it announced record Q1 and Q2 figures this year. Any time AMD hits $50 I shall invest; I already have a wad of Intel.|
|The above comments about the technical options position were based in part on comments on ragingbull and other US boards. Actually the net short position based on options is currently probably only around 2million shares or less which is a fraction of daily volume. Therefore this will probably not have such a big impact as I thought.
In charting terms, the stock is through all support and falls to $50 or so seem likely. Crazy, but there you have it.|
"ON chips, Intel manfacture at 0.18 micron level which, added to its superior FAB quality control make its gross margins way ahead of AMD"
1. AMD have ben manufacturing at 0.18 for a looong time now as well.
2. Evidence for the gross margings being higher ? In fact given that about 12 times more AMD 1GHZ chips have been shipped than Intel 1GHZ chips, i would suggest that it might be the other way round.
p.s. why doesnt it like '' as the first character on a line - it just disappears !|
|Well well well! I have been long this stock for a while (average purchase price $82 unfortunately). It certainly deserves to have a following on this BB.
The current year P/E level of around 12 is hard to explain compared with its peers. As well as the processor interest (AMD seem to be cleaning up in the 800Mhz plus sector of the market - their chips are cheaper and more available than Intel's), AMD is a big player in the flash memory market - probably the biggest player in fact (joint venture with Fujitsu).
The stock is currently down on fears of an easing of supply in the flash memory market, also for technical reasons due to a large number of in-the-money August put options matched by open shorts. This technical oversold situation should ease next week as the August 18 option date approaches.
Flash memory fears are probably misplaced in AMD's case, since their flash production for the next two years is apparently already pre-sold to telecoms customers such as Cisco and Nortel. Also AMD's flash memory is slightly different from most, as I understand it - AMD's has a reputation for speed and premium reliability and is popular with telecoms equipment manufacturers; others (such as Intel's) flash is phyically smaller and lower-powered and better targeted at consumer products.
Link to my thread on the free board: http://www.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=423817|
|Intel's gross margin 63 - 64%, AMD's 52% - Intel's margins 20% ahead of AMD (source: last quarter results and company projections).
Like I say, both companies are a buy but one has better longer-term qualities that reduce investment risk, and INtrel will exploit 0.18 manufacturing capability better than AMD.|
|AMD have been going for it technologically over the last couple of years. They introduced 3D now technology into their chips, which they then sub licensed to other chip makers (Cyrix most notably). There's even support built into Microsoft's DirextX (software API for getting good performance out of PC apps) for AMD specific chip features.
The need for 64bit architecture over 32 bit isn't as clear cut as 32 bit over 16bit so I echo comments on the take up being slower. The way AMD have gone about this processor bus expansion is almost identical to the way Intel did the same with the 386 about 15 years ago.
AMD are big enough to produce a following for their 64bit incarnation, but it won't be until someone like Microsoft produces a Windows-a-like 64bit OS, that there will be large corporate uptake. Home users will buy it because it'll presumably be clocked faster and therefore run standard 32bit apps and OSs faster and it'll be priced more competitively than equivalent Intel offerings.|
buy high sell low
|http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=amd&d=3m&c=INTC the URL for a comparison of 3-month stock performance. INtersting because over the last year AMD have it over Intel and shot up as they moved into profit
Intel's stock has consistently outperformed (you don't get a $400bn market cap without doing a lot right)|
|I think both companies are a buy because demand is so strong at the moment. This allows AMD to grow even though it has manufacturing reliability costs which Intel does not.
ON chips, Intel manfacture at 0.18 micron level which, added to its superior FAB quality control make its gross margins way ahead of AMD. AMD cannot ramp a product anywhere near as fast, so even if when they have in tha past gained a first move advantage they have never been able to sustain it.
However, AMD are in profit now and should be able to deliver $5 eps not because of their chip production but because of the high demand for flash memory (they just signed deals with Nortel, Philips and Siemens.
These two are not the only players in the lower end chip market and strategically I would buy Intel not AMD. The products in the annoucement were at the higher market end and Intel has been caned recently because it just could not keep up with demand. This allowed AMD to steal a touch of market share which some may have construed as it having superior products to Intel. In the next few months AMD will relinquish that chip market share back to Intel. Intel has about 85% of the market and has the know-how to sustain this level of market leadership regardless. It reported record first and second quarter profits and the shares are cheap at the current levels - having just has a 2/1 split I expect them to double in the next twelve months to give a market cap of about $750bn.
AMD a buy, Intel a strong buy.|
|I have been trying to get my hands on an Itanium system recently, there are apparently some developer systems around, but so far have been met with a deafening silence!
It looks like the switch to 64 bit is going to much slower than the switch from 16 to 32 bits was.
|For those that are interested, there is an article just out today on Anandtech about AMDs proposed ISA to rival Intels new IA-64
"Ambition can be a double edged sword; on the one hand, it can push you to accomplish that which you'd previously never thought possible, yet on the other, it can set you up for a much larger failure in the long run.
In our "little" microprocessor community, we've got two very ambitious manufacturers, the very same names you've been hearing and debating over for the past few years, none other than AMD and Intel. Prior to AMD's release of their Athlon processor, which, for the longest time bore the codename 'K7', placing AMD's name before Intel's in a sentence was pretty much unheard of. The company had been improving their stance in the desktop microprocessor industry, but they were still more than a few steps behind Intel.
Now, just under a year after AMD's Athlon release, the company is discussing its plans to compete not only in the desktop, workstation and server markets but also in the extremely high-end enterprise market segment. You can't say that AMD hasn't come a long way from the time when their flagship processor was the K6.
Intel has been keeping themselves busy as well; in addition to maintaining their usual product lines covering the mobile, value, performance and server market segments, they are juggling the launch of the new Pentium 4 all while preparing to introduce their first major step away from the IA-32 x86 instruction set architecture (ISA) to their first 64-bit architecture, IA-64. With IA-64, Intel is promising to be free of the shackles that the x86 ISA has placed on their CPUs for over 2 decades, but in doing that, they are also flushing the idea of high performing backwards compatibility with older IA-32 applications.
If you look around the microprocessor industry, especially at those companies that already have 64-bit parts available, Intel's strategy for IA-64 isn't all that extreme. Other companies rely on emulation or even separate processors in order to maintain backwards compatibility with 32-bit applications for those customers that are not ready to completely migrate entirely to a 64-bit OS with 64-bit applications. This puts a lot of weight on the consumer (in this case, large businesses, not your usual definition of the word) to decide when moving over to a 64-bit platform would be ideal, since using this approach, you're almost never allowed to have the best of both worlds, a high performing 32-bit solution and 64-bit compatibility.
AMD saw a major flaw with this approach and felt that there should be a way for them to become a supplier of a 64-bit processor without making the consumer sacrifice 32-bit performance for that support. We're already familiar with AMD's solution to this problem as they've already announced that they'd be extending the 32-bit x86 ISA to 64-bits with what they call x86-64, but now we're finally beginning to see exactly how x86-64 will work and what it will mean for AMD's future enterprise platform, the K8, also known as SledgeHammer. "
"...by building on the x86 ISA yet again AMD is still bringing along with them all the added baggage that comes with the x86 ISA. We asked AMD about this noticeable downside and their stance on the issue is simple, they believe that 'performance has less to do with instruction set and more to do with implementation,' which is what they're banking on with x86-64...."
Full article from Anandtech|
|Sorry about the delay in replying.
The answer to your question is "Yes" - see my first posting. AMD Fujitsu (joint venture between AMD and some Japanese co) is the world's largest manufacturer of flash memory (or at least in joint first place). Plenty of recent announcements about doubling capacity this year, next year and the year after, etc. If you search US financial news for AMD, you will see some analysts pointing out that AMD's entire market cap is lower than some of its pure Flash memory competitors.
Basically AMD is on a low P/E because it was near bankruptcy (I think) 18 months ago and people are finding it hard to believe that it can have come back so quickly. But it is certainly very profitable at the moment and the trend looks set to continue. Only downside risk is a general decline in the worldwide PC/chip market (which is cyclical) or a price war with Intel. Since AMD makes both processors and flash memory, it is well-positioned for either event - e.g. in a price war, Intel would come off just as badly.|
|Flash Memory seems to be the 'hot chip' of the day, with Telewest, PACE
and others suffering due to an alledged lack of availability....
Do AMD make these ?|
AMD is, for me, the company that will do best out of the current trend towards having a PC in every home. Just a thought ...|
|Time to resurrect this thread, I think.
It looks as though this share is stuck in a trading range from $73 - $92 (and currently right at the bottom of that range).
Personally, I am surprised it didn't break out on its superb second quarter results.|
|onwards and upwards - $100 here we come|
|This is great! Come on you AMD fans!|
|AMD has had the most astounding bull run over the 6 months to May. It is virtually the only large cap US tech stock that went up during March-May 2000 - and fairly strongly too.
My impression is that AMD's fortunes have recovered to such an extent that going forward it is neck and neck with Intel. Although Intel still has more volume of processor sales, due to production problems AMD is catching up fast. And AMD (or AMD Fujitsu) probably has the edge over Intel in the flash memory market.
Here is a chart:|