Re: A.M.D. to Split Into Two Operations

On Oct 11, 12:44=A0am, "Del Cecchi" <delcecchioftheno...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> "Robert Myers" <rbmyers...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:c53141e1-0fc8-4351-b4d3-36afc071e992@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Oct 9, 9:47 am, chrisv <chr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Robert Myers wrote:
> > >On Oct 8, 10:12 am, chrisv <chr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > >> Gosh, you are smart. Only you (and the blogger) have figured-out
> > >> that
> > >> AMD decided to do this not because they thought it was in the
> > >> best
> > >> interest of the company and its stockholders, but because they
> > >> have a
> > >> benevolent streak toward bankers.
>
> > >There are plenty of people who would agree that cor****ate
> > >management,
> > >often acting on the advice of outside consultants, frequently do
> > >not
> > >act in the best interests of shareholders.
>
> > So? The fact that things are "sometimes wrong" is evidence that
> > something is "wrong" with this deal?
>
> > Sorry, but it's not.
>
> Now *you're* an expert? =A0I don't think you pay attention to what you
> write. =A0You were sarcastic that I had the nerve to question AMD's all-
> knowing management. =A0I pointed out that the kind of criticism that
> both I and the blogger offered is fairly common. =A0Whether it's
> accurate criticism of this deal or not is beside the point. =A0As usual,
> everyone who doesn't agree with you and cheer for AMD is an idiot--at
> least from your point of view.
>
> If you already knew what the blogger said or if you had some
> subatantive response, you didn't say so. =A0Instead, you did what you
> usually do: ridicule and bluster.
>
> Robert.
>
> Silly me. =A0I guessed that this was an effort for AMD to survive as a
> semi-fabless organization, regardless of the statement of a previous
> ceo "real men own fabs". =A0But Jerry Sanders is long gone from AMD and
> fabs are extremely expensive.
>
> If I ask nice would all you guys quit fighting about who is smarter
> etc? =A0Me, I'm glad I didn't buy AMD at 40 in 2006....
> Anyway, the bickering is sort of offputting.
>
That's disappointing from you.  I had no intention of responding to
Chris' post.  I offered a different perspective on what was going on
from someone other than me and got the usual "You hate AMD" response.
In actual fact, at this point, I could care less.

What I have cared about is the partisan environment here that has shut
off differing points of view.  In actual fact, I have no idea what the
future holds for AMD or for Intel, although I have been publicly
pessimistic about AMD for a long time--as have many others.

Chris, Robert, and Keith may be very personable in the flesh.  That
has not been experience of them here.  Anyone with half a brain cell,
might have that half a brain cell flickering right know to question
the free market mantra of the University of Chicago.  In fact, knees
are beginning to buckle even there.  It's not so much that people have
some set of beliefs or other about free markets or companies or a
particular technology.  It's the readiness to disparage other points
of view as unworthy of consideration that is, if nothing else, a very
bad habit for technical people to fall into.  I'll be offputting from
now until doomsday about mob thinking.

Robert.