The three scenarios proposed by Mr. McIntyre to save AMD have some merits and yet do not actually address the underlying and fundamental problems.

I do agree that infusion or replacement to AMD current leadership is must at this critical juncture. The upper management was given ample time to address and redress the underlying problems. I believe they were too slow to react to changing market developments. They either underestimated the quick response by Intel when its hegemony was directly challenged. Mr. Ruiz, the chairman of AMD, has steered the company into volatile territories. The emphasis on capturing large market share at the expense of profits and superior product quality has proven to be highly costly.

The acquisition of ATI by itself was not a bad decision. It made AMD more diversified and less dependent on specific product segment. However, I think the bad idea was to pay a high price for its acquisition. AMD should have acquired ATI at either lower price or made bids to acquire smaller companies.

Selling AMD to a more stable company sounds attractive as its needs a lot of cash infusion to sustain its operation. A take-over will allow AMD to compete better against its larger rival. Its current share price is dismal to what it was one or two years ago.

I believe the market cannot afford the demise of AMD since it leads and fosters the re-emergence of monopolistic environment. Clients and customers of AMD also have a lot at stakes in seeing AMD prosper. Buyers will be protected against paying high prices, they will have the option to select among variety of products, and above all they will not see themselves at the mercy of one supplier.

Joe Baaklini

Funny, last I've been reading, Intels stock has been dropping every day.

I bought AMD at $6 because it's average price has been $13 and it'll get back there this year!
They have good products at reasonable prices and they're leaner and more efficient than Intel, who plays dirty pool. They're being investigated in Europe right now for product dumping.
The US gov is too easy on Intel monopolistic practices. THAT's the reason AMD is having a hard time.

AMD has good prices and good products, Intel knows it too. That's why Intel is under investigation, in Europe at least, for dumping products and ruining the market for other chippers.
$6 AMD is a $13 historical average stock and now's a good chance to double your money in a year.

Funny how time distorts the facts. Since, historically, AMD has been forced to compete on price everyone blames the recent price war on them. The fact is that once Intel finally developed product that could compete at AMD's level last year they are the ones who started the price war to regain marketshare. As far as margins go, if you look at the 3rd quarter results AMD's operating margins improved markedly better than Intel's. Further proof that AMD was the one that was more interested in profits than marketshare. Intel's ploy worked here in the short term. By reacting to Intel's moves along with the hefty price tag for ATI, AMD has weakened their balance sheet. However, it seems like AMD introduces a new chip every week based on some ATI architecture that allows them to enter markets they never competed in before, or improve their competitiveness in markets they were already in. Long-term the ATI purchase may be a real big positive and once the production bottleneck on Barcelona gets cleared up completely you will see considerable improvement in both marketshare and margins. AMD should open lower today on the underperforming results of Intel yesterday, but this is a perfect buy scenario with the a strong possiblity of more than doubling one's money a year from now.