Intel: EC set out to find us guilty

"It is perhaps most remarkable that the Commission's decision essentially ignored the undisputable fact that microprocessor prices have declined significantly year over year, while innovation has proceeded at a stunning pace."

Erm so ..... maybe I'm not getting this but all that means is AMD dropped prices to compete and intel dropped prices to compete. It's the illegal rebates et al from intel that are the issue here. If intel had not dropped their prices at all then the rebates wouldn't have made much difference and there wouldn't have been such an issue as both intel and amd could've competed fairly and the consumer could've decided who was really better for them rather than leaving it for intel to decide.

By koshthetrekkie on 22 Sep 2009

Fed Up with EC

I don't understand why it is wrong for Intel to reduce it's prices if it can afford it. If the competitors can't match it then that is their problem not Intel's. The only effect the EC has so far is increase the cost to the consumer by their interference.

By curiousclive on 22 Sep 2009

@curiousclive that's not quite right though. Intel (who are far larger than AMD) offered large rebates to the likes of dell, hp etc so that they would not buy from AMD. This was not a "price drop" from Intel to try and compete with AMD, this was a backhander to dell, hp on condition that they did not buy any AMD products.

AMD who are a smaller company couldn't hope to do the same type of deal intel did and wouldn't want to as it's illegal.

If you read the published excerpts from dell, hp, lenovo, etc from:

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?refe
rence=MEMO/09/400&type=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&gui
Language=fr

it clearly states that for the likes of dell and HP to maximise profits and stay competitive with other PC sellers it was in their interest to take intel's deal. While this is partly their fault as well as intel's these types of deals are unfair for both AMD and the consumer as it didn't encourage consumer controlled competition between intel and amd it just ruled amd out on price and left the consumer with fewer choices.

Case in point (from the above link) an HP executive wrote to intel:

"PLEASE DO NOT… communicate to the regions, your team members or AMD that we are constrained to 5% AMD by pursuing the Intel agreement".

so in other words "yeah we'll take advantage of the great deal you're (intel) are giving us but don't tell anyone including amd as then they won't be trying to get the same / better deal and we can then keep our prices up with the other pc manufacturers and make more money than them.

This is what the issue is and the EU is completely justified and right (for once) to slap intel stupid for it.

By koshthetrekkie on 22 Sep 2009

We all know this one. If, in a couple of years time, it shows that Intels tactics did harm the competition, and the EC goes after them then, then it will be to late. We've seen that happen with Internet Explorer.

Funny how Intel doesn't deny making these kinds of deals, but instead opts to argue that it didn't harm competition. Intel should simply stick to the law like everyone else, and all will be good.

By Woudenberg on 23 Sep 2009

Intel Vs EU

It is a prosecutors job to prove that a company is guilty of an offense.
If Intel showed it was not guilty the fine would not have been applicable.

Trying to deride the court decision IN PUBLIC is nothing short of showing contempt.

Someone at Intel should be prosecuted for their continued PUBLIC CONTEMPT of court.

There are correct ways to appeal and bleating is not one of them.

By lenmontieth on 23 Sep 2009