I am curious about something. AMD and Intel have been competing head to head for more than 15 years, at least since AMD released its Intel 386 clone in the early 90s. In that time, inarguably, microprocessor prices have plumeted and processing power and other features have increased dramatically (I’m aware that we don’t know what the but-for world would look like, but these effects have been enormous). If you search the web you can find countless articles on price wars between AMD and Intel, and of course we all know about Intel’s rebates and other price-cutting maneuvers. So for more than 15 years (or, in the EU’s investigation, at least since 2002) Intel has been taking a hit on prices, biding its time, according to the European Commission and AMD, until it can finally rid itself of its meddlesome competitor (at which time, of course, no other competitor, not Nvidia, for example, nor IBM, will take AMD’s place). For how long does Intel need to keep fighting this losing battle before the antitrust authorities would agree to sit on the sidelines, watching it play out to consumers’ great benefit? What must all those Intel shareholders of yesteryear be thinking as they watched their profits squandered for a speculative future gain (again, according to antitrust plaintiffs, private and government alike) that has still failed to materialize?
Cite this Article
Geoffrey Manne, A quick note on Intel, Truth on the Market (May 13, 2009), https://truthonthemarket.com/2009/05/13/a-quick-note-on-intel/