Comments on: Poll: Is the EU decision against Intel fair?

The question of whether Intel engages in abusive market behavior has been answered by the EU. Or has it?

[puterhead]

I believe that the fine is fair and well deserved. Intel used illegal tactics worldwide for years to stifle competition and harm the consumers with lack of choice and higher prices.

Just a few comments on the prior posts. The EU gets the money not AMD because they did not approach it as AMD as the victim. While the evidence was about AMD as well as VIA and others, the victim of the crime were the consumers and as such the fine goes to the EU member countries who can, if they choose, give a tax break to the populous. So the fine is in a round about way getting to the victims as it should. AMD, VIA , Cyrix and other manufacturers harmed by Intel's practices need to get any compensation on their own. Some thing that is made easier I am sure with this judgment on the table now.

As was pointed out in a prior post, at the time of the complaint AMD had THE processor architecture to beat. It walked all over Intel's designs and virtually every PC manufacturer out there, regardless if they were Intel exclusive shops prior to this time frame, were developing AMD lines. Everyone seems to want to say that AMD and other cpu manufacturers need to step up and make a better processor if they want to compete in the market. The simple fact is that AMD did just that and instead of the "free market" deciding their fate, which by the way they increased their market share considerably during those days on the relatively few pc manufacturers that offered their designs side by side with Intel's, Intel used their pocket books to derail their progress. Intel did not make a better processor to compete as you seem to like to say about AMD. The designs that Intel have come out with in the last few years were products that came about after several years of AMD dominating almost all categories of processors in both performance, price and efficiency.

If AMD had been given free access to the market with all the manufacturers, and those manufactures free to develop and release AMD designs from the start without fear of reprisals from Intel, things might look a lot differently today. Many people like to talk about how much better Intel's designs are today, but they only came about due to the stiff competition that AMD was giving them in chip designs. Intel had near endless pockets in the time period in question, yet instead of putting it into R&D to compete with AMD they first spent years, YEARS, limping along on the same designs and spending that money into offering the consumer less, not more.

[JonathonDD]

This is nonsense- manufacturer's get to choose who they want to deal with- if they don't want to deal with AMD because intel is offering them a better deal THAT IS THEIR CHOICE. Its not up to the EU to decide what chips you're allowed to sell.. Stealing 1.4 billion from intel forces them to either raise their prices, or cut the wages of their employees. How does this help anyone besides its competitor's who can't offer any good deals?

[odubtaig]

puterhead, thankyou.

Jonathon, I don't give a crap what way you paint it, companies are free to choose the best product for them but that's not what happened. If these companies didn't do what Intel asked, they'd have to pay more for Intel chips. That's not freedom of choice for these companies, that's coercion. There is no other word for it. Intel put these companies in a position where they had to shaft AMD just to compete.

So, given that consumers were denied a true choice as to which chip to use, Intel defrauded the EU consumer base and got money out of us that they would'nt have had through fair competition.

The EU hasn't stolen anything, we're taking what's rightfully ours.

[rsrupert1972]

What's rightfully yours? I really think you need to rethink that one myself. In the end, you're only shooting yourself in your foot. Besides, all these companies made the choice to buy the cheaper ones. They could've said no, and paid higher costs (which would've been passed on to the consumer ( which by the way made things CHEAPER for you)) but they didn't.

[shakazzolo]

Here is why I didn't chose the following options:
1- "No, Its just a competitive market"... give me a break. That's like saying its OK to block AMD's shipping supplies because its a competitive market... which is what Intel just did! They basically blocked their supplies from reaching the market!!!

2- "Who cares? Everyone engages in bad behavior sometimes." I'm sure they have done more things here in the USA that don't even compair to what happened in EU (for the past 7 years!)

[JonathonDD]

If they blocked AMD"s shipping supplies with a gun then yes it wouldn't be right- but if they're offering a better deal..then more power to them. Obviously retailers aren't stupid- they know people love intel products and they will stock them. If AMD could appear more appealing to consumers then retailers would've chose them over intel in a second. The simple fact is NO CONSUMERS were hurt because consumers like intel. I know there's AMD fans that love the fact that intel is losing billions- but that doesn't change the fact that AMD hasn't been competing as well and can't offer any good deals to retailers. Why should the EU prop up a company like AMD that doesn't know how to compete properly? This hurts consumers, period.

[odubtaig]

There's at least a dozen people here complaining because the money isn't going to AMD. Exactly how is the EU 'propping up' AMD?

Now, take that imaginary gun and shove it, anyone who has two brain cells to rub together know that threatening a company's bottom line if they don't drop the competition is a lot more effective than any projectile weapon. It's true that Intel only put it as offering 'incentives' to delay or drop AMd products but if these companies didn't do as Intel asked they still payed more than if they didn't so the bottom line is: Intel put a tax on allowing competition. Intel artificially increased the cost of doing business with AMD. It's hard for AMD to offer a good deal when there's a hidden cost to their chips even they don't know about.

So, who's not competing properly? Could it be the company putting penalties on those who should so dare to do business with anyone else?

[pustulous]

Hey JonathonDD

Just one question: Are you aware that they make bras for DD men, now?

Okay, my bad. Two questions: Can you explain why WalMart isn't in Europe anymore?

Just wondering.

Because it sounds like you're an economics genius.

Or something.

[JonathonDD]

This is complete nonsense. So intel gets punished because they offered discounts to suppliers who bought more of their product? What in god's name is wrong with that? So if I'm selling pizza and give you a discount for buying 2 large pizzas instead of 1 then I've engaged in "monopolistic practices". Simply put- if AMD was more competitive they wouldn't need to try steal 1.4 billion from Intel. Intel is just being competitive- AMD could've offered retailers better deals so they would stock their chips instead but they didn't.

The people at the EU have no understanding of how economics or business works- and that's exactly why they became politicians. You cannot have a monopoly unless there is government enforcement behind it- as long as you remove barriers to entry in the market such as taxes, license/permit requirements, all kinds of regulations- a monopoly cannot exist because if there is an area to make high profits another competitor will arise.

The EU and USA antitrust laws don't even try to break up actual monopolies(like the US post office), they just fine businesses that they don't like.

[pithenumber]

the money is going to the EU, not AMD

and your selling of pizzas is not a monopoly
if your pizza company controlled 90% of the market, and you started offering discounts beyond what is "normal" then you would be doing monopolistic practices

[The_Walrus]

About half the comments seem to be from morons who feel that any business can do anything it wants to. OK, so you are Americans, and you say that's your religion. Elsewhere, bribery and corruption are illegal. Have the manners to remember that when you are in other countries, please.

[SlimGem]

"Elsewhere, bribery and corruption are illegal."

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean that they aren't commonplace and an accepted way of life in many countries.

[odubtaig]

Like Italy, which itself has been in danger of being fined by the EU.

[jennyt50]

Intel should raise their prices, but only for units sold in the EU. In this way they can pay for the fine through the people who chose the government that fined them, though the reason given should be to allow other companies to compete.

[forever4now]

If you consider how much money Intel would have lost in the long term, if AMD had gained significant market share (providing it with even more money for further innovation), $1.45B may be a bargain.

[rsrupert1972]

Intel should triple prices, right along with Microsoft in the EU. Make the EU ppl pay for the massive fines that they have incured.

[pustulous]

I agree: Intel should increase their prices by at least 89%.

But wait.

AMD should offer an exchange program. Trade-in your Intel-based system, and get 89% off a new AMD-based 'puter.

Then AMD can refit the stockpile of 'puters with AMD parts and sell them on eBay for cheap and donate the proceeds to assisting economics geniuses such as yourselves.

[assman]

The truth is that the EU Commission is the one abusing its power. It's ******* ridiculous how they stifle the free-market and pocket the earnings. Who's watching the watchmen? They need someone questioning their own motives.

[martin1212]

Actually they are protecting the free market. It amazes me that some of the commentators here seem to completely ignore the actual overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing in the case in their ideological rants.

[pustulous]

@ asshat

**YA-AWNNNN*

Oh wow, look at the lemmings!

[gerrrg]

Russia cuts off their gas, and they whimper. Intel pushed AMD into the dirt, and they fine them $1.45 billion?

Not only is the EU a bully, but they're using Intel as a proxy for the US mortgage-backed derivatives meltdown. $1.45 billion has nothing to do with any anti-competitive practices; if they wanted to punish Intel, they would have used their socialist power to tack on tariffs onto Intel CPU sales. Instead, they did the greedy capitalist move and fined Intel $1.45 billion.

[pustulous]

Tissues... where the blazes did those tissues go...

CAN SOMEONE GET GERRRG A TISSUE, PLEASE??

EU operates differently than the US market. Personally? In this instance, I think the EU got it right.

Now, with regards to the slimmed-down Windows in EU.... ....

A built-to-order customized Windows OS would be awesome. It would've assured Microsoft larger sales and fewer gripes with regards to Vista.

Does anyone else find it humorous that Microsoft had to go and revamp Vista, call it Windows 7 and is *now* claiming that *this time* they've *really* listened to what the people want.

I could've swore they said the same thing with Windows ME. And Windows XP. And Windows Vista.

Gotta hand it to MS: they screw something up, they tend to get the next OS release right.

Or they screw it up really big.

:D

[quash_bug]

Microsoft's slimmed down European version of Windows seems to be flying off the shelves in Europe.
The EU really seems to know what the people want... the EU really listens... LOL!!!!
i only have a ?..
!!!WHO'S NEXT?!!
Apple might be a good candidate for Leeching.
Watch out big companies.. the EU tape worm is going to get you and eat you all up!! LMAO

[pithenumber]

AMD isn't getting paid anything, its just the corrupted EU stealing money from a US company

[pustulous]

Yeah!

You tell 'em!

The EU is stealing money back from Intel!

I totally agree with your point!

(Except Intel operates and sells globally. Might want to do your research prior to posting)

[Electric_Bill]

The author insinuates that AMD has itself to blame for it's market standing and shows a number of examples to bolster this.
The title of this article is "Poll: Is the EU decision against Intel fair?" and the decision of the European Commission is about Intel's unscrupulous marketing strategy.
If the author wanted a poll about who makes the best processors he should have asked that.

[William Crow]

As increasing number of US Democrats, and, apparently, most EU officials would say..."Freedom is Slavery."

[scythie]

I just hope AMD improves on their CPUs, especially their mobile CPUs. They run really hot and kill battery life.

AMD/ATI is already gaining ground in the GPU world. Hopefully, their CPUs follow suit.

Competition is always good.

[timber2005]

The points about the fines going to the EU are pretty substancial and interesting... so, hey CNET, how about an inqury on this?

"Where does the BILLIONS of fines collected by the EU go?". It sure hasn't been the competetor.

[odubtaig]

Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.
Read the statement of judgement.

[martin1212]

@odubtaig - this is an internet forum. You expect people to actually think before posting? The fact that this was a 4 years case with a 500+ page judgement means nothing to the intellectual giants here. They have it all figured out in 5 seconds.

[pustulous]

Akshully, Martin, it took me 2.385 seconds.

(Minor correction)

(But props to you, it was dangerously close!)

[pentest]

If scummy companies such as Intel and MS don't want to pay these huge fines, the solution is obvious and simple: act in a legal and ethical manner.

[rsrupert1972]

how about don't give the EU ppl the current crop of products, let them stick with the stuff from 4 years ago.

[ptezza]

If the EU truly wanted to help foster competition in the x86 market space, then they should have awarded monetary damages to AMD. 1.45B seems like an over-the-top slap in the face to Intel. If the EC's whole intent was to simply open up the door for additional AMD civil action law suits (as some have suggested), then a simple "yes Intel your guilty, now AMD go'em" would have worked just fine.

[odubtaig]

Because anti-competitive practices never harm the consumer. No. Of course not.

[artmcg]

Generally you have to hit a donkey over the head with a 2X4 to get their attention. Then you tell them what you want them to do. I.E. Intel needs to cease their monopolistic behaviors. The Korean and Japanese fines were trivial, so Intel says "we didn't do anything wrong". One must assume they are going to continue these behaviors.

[aji125]

Any history majors here? I'm curious, with anti-trust talk, what Standard Oil's (Rockefeller) market share was before it was split into many companies. Also the phone monopoly (was it AT&T?) and its market share. I'm not contesting any comments, just wondering how these companies and their market share may compare to Intel. Back in the day the gov't split apart quite a few companies that may or may not have boosted their market share to a high level through shady practices.

[godo--2008]

A free market only works if governments prevent the formation of cartels and monopolies that result when companies use their size to stifle competition. Society benefits when everyone has the chance to pick their favorite product. I am grateful to the EU for doing the job.

[pustulous]

Might be the largest reason why Oracle remains on US soil. They can buy all of their competition, and the US guv'll give them a thumbs up and a wink ;)

[artmcg]

Nice how the ad before the article is an Intel ad. Kinda shows how journalists are so unbiased.

[pustulous]

Intel pulls the same bulldog tactics here in the states as well. Maybe it's time the US guv investigated Intel.

And for anyone here thinking AMD is picking-on Intel: neener. Intel and AMD are not the only processor players in the market. VIA pretty much invented the ITX, Mini-ITX, Pico ITX, and Nano ITX formats. If not for VIA pushing forward in a different direction than Intel or AMD, Intel might have taken longer to create the Atom processor.

It's always been about David Vs. Goliath. Except now Goliath has a $1.45 billion boo-boo.

Always rooted for the underdogs. ;)

[pustulous]

Okay, kiddies. Time to settle down.

Warm milk & fresh-baked cookies for all who can behave for 30 seconds...

(Warm Soy milk for those with sensitive tummies)