AMD Claims Intel Collected $60 Billion in Illegal Profits

The latest development in a pending antitrust suit by CPU manufacturer Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) against its cheif rival, Intel, comes in the form of a glimpse at the case AMD will present in a Delaware federal court. According to a report by Michael Williams, director of ERS Group, an economist hired by AMD, Intel allegedly pocketed $60 billion in ill-gotten, or "monopoly," profits from a decade of anti-competitive behavior. Naturally, Intel dismissed the claims as "wildly speculative and based on flawed assumptions about Intel and the market." "The only thing one can conclude from the study is that if you pay someone enough money you can get them to say almost anything," said Intel spokesman Chris Mulloy.

In the wake of antitrust charges filed by European Commission regulators, AMD hopes to revitalize its case against Intel in the US; the company plans to show the study to US regulators over the next several weeks, in an effort to encourage government action. The study itself bases the $60 billion calculation on the charges filed by the EU commission, as well as a Japanese antitrust case against Intel in 2005. In the report, Williams concludes that absent Intel's market behavior, the average $1,000 computer would cost consumers nearly 1.5 percent, or $14.89, less.

However, doubts about the accuracy of the report come not only from Intel, but from other antitrust lawyers around the US; they point at that economists can differ significantly in their analyses of a market. Colin Underwood, an antitrust attorney with Proskauer Rose in New York, states "Economists are hired to offer opinions to support a case, not to question it. They are hired guns. They will only shoot at the target you want them to shoot at."

Intel has continued to claim it has broken no antitrust laws in any country and vowed last week to persuade EU officials to drop the charges filed against the company.

View: Full Story on SiliconValley.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Lawyer Claims iPhone Buyers Ill-Informed About Battery

Next Story

Immigration Game Explores Social Issues

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The U.S. couldn't even get rid of Saddam Hussein. And we all know that the EU is just a passing fad. They'll be killing each other again in less than a year. I'm sick to death of all these fascist lawsuits.
Bill Gates

old quote but its always good

So AMD is under the illusion of a monopoly market. Hhmmm...
When was the last time any of us went to a computer store and they had only one brand of processors?

Exactly.

C_Guy said,
So AMD is under the illusion of a monopoly market. Hhmmm...
When was the last time any of us went to a computer store and they had only one brand of processors?

Exactly.

True. I chose Intel btw because AMD refuses to support my operating system of choice. Therefore, AMD has locked itself out of the possibility of having me, and many people like me, as their customer.

C_Guy said,
So AMD is under the illusion of a monopoly market. Hhmmm...
When was the last time any of us went to a computer store and they had only one brand of processors?

Exactly.

If I choose to only sell intel because I have had good experiences with intel and bad ones with amd whats wrong with that its my store my choice what I buy and sell

but your right most stores do stock both

and Intel dose not force people to not buy or sell amd products and dose not pay people not to
they offer rebates amd dose not

The only thing one can conclude from the study is that if you pay someone enough money you can get them to say almost anything,
Intel is speaking about itself right there, right?

Pip'

Intel is guilty.

I know first hand how they do business, they threaten, intimidate, bribe, whatever it takes to stop you from selling AMD products and you have to obey them.

how in the heck can they even guesstimate at $60 million. I wouldn't disblieve some anti competitive actions, but to think you know what your rival has sold, and what his profit margins are.....especially for a giant like Intel, thats just wrong. Shouldn't be tossing numbers around like that...

I hope the EU Commission and AMD rape Intel for all their worth. I'm sick of large companies controlling most of the markets, and stamping out anyone who dares challenge them. 50 years ago we had hundreds of car companies to choose from, today, we have just a few. There's too much power and money in to few hands these days.

For those who say "Well that's just how business is, the consumption of larger companies devouring smaller ones is normal" I agree, but there must be limits imposed upon such devouring, so that the consumer doesn't get ****ed in the end. As is the case now with CPUs. The Core 2 Duo are Intels response to AMD kicking their ass for two years, but what happens if AMD never again is able to take the performence lead? Oh that's right more stagnation in the CPU market, and jacked up prices for for minor gains in technology.

..... of course they have their down sides, but they also provide far more stable jobs, increased pay for the joe smoe crowd, and better benefits. they also spend far more in research and development than smaller entities are able to.

i honestly agree with you, but think it through a bit, its not so cut and dry

thornz0 said,
..... of course they have their down sides, but they also provide far more stable jobs, increased pay for the joe smoe crowd, and better benefits. they also spend far more in research and development than smaller entities are able to.

i honestly agree with you, but think it through a bit, its not so cut and dry

...and then they're able to jack up the prices to whatever they want, making regular joe smoe's paycheck meaningless.

Eis said,

...and then they're able to jack up the prices to whatever they want, making regular joe smoe's paycheck meaningless.

So Intel(The Man) is charging more, while AMD(the one who The Man is holding down) is charging less for their product. Even though The Man has a much larger market share. For some reason what you said in your last few post makes no sense.

reidtheweed01 said,
So Intel(The Man) is charging more, while AMD(the one who The Man is holding down) is charging less for their product. Even though The Man has a much larger market share. For some reason what you said in your last few post makes no sense.

I said that even though the benefit of having a large company is a steady and increased paycheck, that company is able to increase their prices due to lack of competition--rendering the large paycheck useless. I apologize if I disguised that in a way your brain was unable to comprehend and made you take the offensive on someone you agree with.

Wait, no I don't. Thanks for agreeing with me, and learn to read.

If you're using 'lead' in the traditional sense of the word, you're absolutely and completely wrong. AMD was never in the lead.

If you meant AMD has been whining a lot sense they lost a few percentages of the market share, say that. But, Intel has always been ahead of AMD.

Sorry but I disagree. I'm talking about the performance lead by the way, not financial or market share. The entire Pentium 4 line in my opinion was pretty much a disaster. Intel just messed up, the design of the P4 and going with Rambus in the beginning. The early Pentium 4s were slower than the Pentium III Tualatin line they were replacing, and while the later models improved greatly they couldn't hold a candle to the speed, efficiency and cost of the Athlon XP.

TRC said,
Sorry but I disagree. I'm talking about the performance lead by the way, not financial or market share. The entire Pentium 4 line in my opinion was pretty much a disaster. Intel just messed up, the design of the P4 and going with Rambus in the beginning. The early Pentium 4s were slower than the Pentium III Tualatin line they were replacing, and while the later models improved greatly they couldn't hold a candle to the speed, efficiency and cost of the Athlon XP.

Agreed. I assumed you meant market share because so many are quick to bring that up first whenever AMD and Intel are mentioned.

TRC said,
Sorry but I disagree. I'm talking about the performance lead by the way, not financial or market share. The entire Pentium 4 line in my opinion was pretty much a disaster. Intel just messed up, the design of the P4 and going with Rambus in the beginning. The early Pentium 4s were slower than the Pentium III Tualatin line they were replacing, and while the later models improved greatly they couldn't hold a candle to the speed, efficiency and cost of the Athlon XP.

Pentium 4 was not a disaster but it did not sell as well as the athalon at that time amd was ahead and intel did not sue them they worked hard to make a better product amd fanboys never die they become trolls and spread false information like amd dose

The red font is really unecessary, and who said that Intel sued them? Also I'm pretty sure it's against the rules to call people names like that, and ironic that you would use those words considering your post. Ever heard about the pot and the kettle? By the way I'm very much an Intel fan, using a Core 2 now.

how is intel offering rebates cash back to resellers/system builders and free stuff illegal?

Maybe their just upset that they are not good at business and people do not like their product

LOL

I think taking intel to court in both the united states and the eu is "anti-competitive"
or spreading false information about your competitor but it looks bad for amd already what do they have to loose

LOL...AMD wants to be sure they do their part in helping the EU with the right 'Fine'

"Feed the Children' Campaign