Friday, July 27th 2007

EU Charges Intel with Monopoly Abuse

EU regulators said Friday they have charged Intel Corp. with monopoly abuse for blocking rival computer chipmaker Advanced Micro Devices Inc.'s access to customers. The European Commission claimed that Intel gave "substantial rebates" to computer makers for buying most of their x86 computer processing units, or CPUs, from Intel; that it made payments to manufacturers to get them to delay or cancel product lines using AMD chips; and that it sold its own chips below cost on average to strategic server customers on bids against AMD products to try to muscle into that business. Intel has a chance to defend itself before the EU's executive arm takes a final decision that could order the company to stop abusive behavior or charge the company with millions of dollars fine.Source: washingtonpost.com
Add your own comment

45 Comments on EU Charges Intel with Monopoly Abuse

#1
Atech
Now there's a surprise. Who saw that coming?
Posted on Reply
#2
Ben Clarke
I did. It's been on AMD's website for months that they were trying to get Intel in court.
Posted on Reply
#3
Atech
by: Ben Clarke
I did. It's been on AMD's website for months that they were trying to get Intel in court.
Do I really need to write tongue in cheek after every sarcastic or otherwise ironic statement? :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#4
mdm-adph
Considering AMD's been trying to get this to happen for the past six years, I'm not holding my breath as to how long it's gonna be until the outcome.
Posted on Reply
#5
Eric3988
For shame Intel, for shame......
Posted on Reply
#6
Cuzza
Lol, the Euros are right into this sorta stuff, look how they keep taking to Microsoft! how come they get away with it in the rest of the world?
Posted on Reply
#7
rampage
that wasnt hard to see comming, well if intel are getting in shit for basicly selling there stuff so cheap, dose this mean we can expect to see a rise in there prices or a delay in there launch of there new products to give AMD time to catch up?
Posted on Reply
#8
Atech
by: rampage
that wasnt hard to see comming, well if intel are getting in shit for basicly selling there stuff so cheap, dose this mean we can expect to see a rise in there prices or a delay in there launch of there new products to give AMD time to catch up?
I haven't read their report, but I'm pretty sure this is about kickbacks to OEMs mostly. The lay system builder shouldn't be affected ;)
Posted on Reply
#9
Judas
Well...Well what goes around comes around
Posted on Reply
#10
Mussels
Moderprator
intel was known for saying 'we will only sell to you, if you dont sell AMD at all'

Or if not saying it, offering big price cuts to people who were 'exclusive' - legal in a way, but it really hurt those who sold AMD/via stuff as well.
Posted on Reply
#11
russianboy
AMD needs more market shares, all of the jobs my father worked for they all used intel on servers :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#12
Ben Clarke
AMD are starting to go back up in the market though... I'm seeing more AMD systems everywhere.
Posted on Reply
#13
jydie
The competition between Intel and AMD has almost gotten out of hand... that is good for consumers, but I think it might be hurting AMD. The way I see it, the "rich" (Intel) are purposely selling their CPUs at or near cost, so they can drive the "poor" (AMD) out of business. It is for this very reason that I am a fan of AMD... I like the underdog. I think Intel has a great product, but they seem to have lost some confidence and are simply out to run AMD out of business... almost like they do not want ANY competition at all. Right now, we pretty much have Intel and AMD... I would love to see even more options. VIA does make CPUs, but they are not sold serparately... just embedded on their own motherboards.
Posted on Reply
#14
Ben Clarke
VIA suck. Their max speed is 1.6GHz single core.
Posted on Reply
#15
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
I don't see the problem, AMD could have done exactly the same thing if they wanted too, so how does the fact that Intel actually did it make them a monopoly?
Posted on Reply
#16
mandelore
mwahaha, take em to the cleaners ^^
Posted on Reply
#17
mdm-adph
by: newtekie1
I don't see the problem, AMD could have done exactly the same thing if they wanted too, so how does the fact that Intel actually did it make them a monopoly?
AMD couldn't have underbid as far as Intel did without going out of business. Intel can afford to distribute CPU's to OEM's at a loss, I'd assume -- far cheaper than AMD could ever even dream of.
Posted on Reply
#18
Glump Bliermp
It's funny how Europeans try to make fun of America for the ability to sue for anything. I see them following our same footsteps and eating their words in a few years.
Posted on Reply
#19
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: mdm-adph
AMD couldn't have underbid as far as Intel did without going out of business. Intel can afford to distribute CPU's to OEM's at a loss, I'd assume -- far cheaper than AMD could ever even dream of.
That is AMD's problem. It isn't Intel's problem that AMD doesn't know how to make up the loss in other divisions. And after buying ATI for, what was it $50 Billion, AMD can't make the argument that they couldn't afford to sell processors at a loss to remain competitive.

It also doesn't help that their production costs per processor has usually been higher than Intel's, thanks to Intel almost always being a manufacturing process ahead, either.

If you want to compete then sell your processor at a lower price, if you can't do that because your production costs are too high because you refuse to move to better manufacturing processes that isn't the fault of your competition.

When they were in the lead they jacked up their prices on their processors. Processors that cost under $100 today were selling for $600 a year ago. Are they selling those processors at a loss today? NO, they aren't, they were just way to greedy a year ago and wanted to make huge profits instead of trying to better establish themselves in the market. If $100 makes them a profit today it would have made them a profit a year ago and it would have also made a lot more people rush to buy their processors.

AMD is in the possition they are in because of their mistakes and their mistakes alone, now they are just trying to sue their way out of it. You know the saying: "If you can't beat them, sue them".
Posted on Reply
#20
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
When AMD was in the lead, as Intel was and is now...they still made profit from selling the procs higher. And you know what? thousands upon thousands flocked to them because of their performance.

AMDs problems now are more they rested on their laurels of A64 instead of reinventing or making better changes to the core architecture.

The ATI buy, in my eyes, is one of their best deals. Not only do they get a graphics power house, but also, chipset sales, tv reception sales, etc.


It just takes time to make money is all. Also, Intel used dirty underhanded techniques for years...Its shoddy and shady, and also, it was brilliant. Only now, they have to live with the consequences.
Posted on Reply
#21
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: WarEagleAU
When AMD was in the lead, as Intel was and is now...they still made profit from selling the procs higher. And you know what? thousands upon thousands flocked to them because of their performance.
Yes, but now they are complaining because too many people stuck with the cheaper Intel brand because they were cheaper and saying they would have been selling processors at a loss. But those same processors that they were selling for $600 a year ago are now $100 and they aren't being sold at a loss, so why sell them at $600 a year ago? If Intel was undercutting them so much and AMD was worried about it maybe they should have lowered their prices. I don't believe for a second that they would have had to sell processors at a loss to remain competitive.
Posted on Reply
#22
mandelore
by: Glump Bliermp
It's funny how Europeans try to make fun of America for the ability to sue for anything. I see them following our same footsteps and eating their words in a few years.
lol, you guys do sue for anything tho hehe

off topic..

I watched topgear when they went to the usa, they gave away a car to a family from a town where tornadoes had ripped everything apart and that family no longer had a working car

Richard Hammond and Jeremy Clarkson got a visit from a lawyer, and guess what?

The family was suing them for giving a car to them for free that was a slightly diff model to the one they said it was.. ffs...
Posted on Reply
#23
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
i dont have a problem with intel's business practices. business is business. but it surely is low of them to pay off companies to delay amd products haha. pure genius!
Posted on Reply
#24
mandelore
by: Easy Rhino
i dont have a problem with intel's business practices. business is business. but it surely is low of them to pay of companies to delay amd products haha. pure genius!
aint that kinda like NV getting into bed with the game devs? :p
Posted on Reply
#25
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
by: mandelore
aint that kinda like NV getting into bed with the game devs? :p
yup. that is what happens. as long as the govts dont get involved in promoting one company or another im fine with it. obviously im against extortion and things of that nature but if you have a product and you want to sell it to many people who will buy it as possible then you have to make deals with all levels.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment