NY Attorney General Probes Intel

[Ca_lawman]

The following story is all over the wire today. My question is, does anyone else see a conflict of interest here? This is a state in which AMD "plans" to build a $3B fab.......it is also headquarters to AMD's biggest fan, IBM. Call me cynical, but it smells very fishy.


http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080110/cuomo_intel.html?
Quote:
In August, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate the company. A letter to the FTC from the New York Democrats said: "If the allegations against Intel are true, the potential harm to consumers could be profound."

In a response in September, the FTC told legislators the agency is barred by law from disclosing investigations. Brian Fallon, a Schumer spokesman, said last year the agency appears to be "slow-walking" the issue.

Schumer has met with AMD representatives about the company's plans to build a $3 billion semiconductor plant in upstate New York, a project strongly backed by the state Legislature and Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

 

[MU_Engineer]

The following story is all over the wire today. My question is, does anyone else see a conflict of interest here? This is a state in which AMD "plans" to build a $3B fab.......it is also headquarters to AMD's biggest fan, IBM. Call me cynical, but it smells very fishy.

There will always be a real or perceived conflict of interest if you look deep enough with *anything* as elected officials take campaign contributions and most have a limited constituency that they'd like to benefit. Did Schumer intentionally launch an investigation of Intel because AMD has plans to build a possible chip fab there? Maybe, but if that were the case, the NY fab has been a rumor for quite some time and he probably would have acted earlier (also while AMD still had money!) if that were the biggest case. My guess is that Schumer is a high-ranking official and election season is quickly approaching. He wants to score a big case like this for himself and his party for good PR come November- the fact that AMD is thinking about building a fab there likely isn't that much of a factor, especially since they have nowhere near the money to do it anytime soon. That's my 2 cents.

 

[purplerat]

The following story is all over the wire today. My question is, does anyone else see a conflict of interest here? This is a state in which AMD "plans" to build a $3B fab.......it is also headquarters to AMD's biggest fan, IBM. Call me cynical, but it smells very fishy.

Not sure what the "conflict" would be. AMD's health as a company is important to the people of NY (ie Me). Sen. Schumer and Rep. Gillibrand were hired (elected) by the people of NY to act in their best interest. If another company may be violating laws intended to protect a fair market then it's in their interest (no confict) to investigate these allegations. Also it's not like the idea of Intel using less then legal/ethical business practices is some far out conspiracy theory. Basically this is goverment doing what they're supposed to do so I don't know why there should be a negative spin on it unless you are/own stock in Intel.

 

[Craxbax]

Oh, PUHHLEEEEEZZZZ!!! Let's not opine about politics on this forum. We have the best government money can buy, period! Whatever selective enforcement of law that is going on has nothing to do with what is best for the public. And Schumer is a politician in the worst sense of the word!

 

[sailer]

My guess is that Schumer is a high-ranking official and election season is quickly approaching. He wants to score a big case like this for himself and his party for good PR come November

I agree that Schumer is looking for publicity more than anything else. He wants to prove that he's doing something other than sitting in his office doing nothing. It should be kept in mind that there is an ocean of difference between launching an investigation and bringing charges. Anyone can get investigated, even any one of us. Investigations by themselves mean nothing. Schumer and all are incensed because "the FTC told legislators tha agency is barred by law from disclosing investigations". Schumer knows this, so what is his point in getting angry that the FTC is obeying the law? Does he think that he is above the law?

Further, since the FTC has presumably investigated and has done nothing, that implies that their investigation revealed that Intel has done nothing legally wrong. To put this into perspective, think of you would feel if it was splashed all over the front pages of newspapers and on the TV for days or months on end that you were being investigated for a rape charge, then a small paragraph on page 10 finally comes out that says the investigation revealed that you were innocent? Would you be angry, outraged at the loss of your reputation? That's a major reason that investigations are not disclosed by reason of law. But Schumer, who knows all of this, doesn't care. He seeks publicity to justify his job and look good in an election campaign.

 

[Ca_lawman]

Not sure what the "conflict" would be. AMD's health as a company is important to the people of NY (ie Me). Sen. Schumer and Rep. Gillibrand were hired (elected) by the people of NY to act in their best interest. If another company may be violating laws intended to protect a fair market then it's in their interest (no confict) to investigate these allegations. Also it's not like the idea of Intel using less then legal/ethical business practices is some far out conspiracy theory. Basically this is goverment doing what they're supposed to do so I don't know why there should be a negative spin on it unless you are/own stock in Intel.

There was a quote from an old movie, The Hunt for Red October, that kind of sums up my idea of a typical politician's character, integrity and intentions regardless of their political affiliations;

"Jeffrey Pelt: Listen, I'm a politician which means I'm a cheat and a liar, and when I'm not kissing babies I'm stealing their lollipops."

Seems interesting to me that no other state AG is investigating Intel and the federal regulators have not found enough supporting evidence to elevate their inquiry to a formal investigation. Additionally, Intel has never been found guilty or admitted any guilt in any national or international court. If I remember correctly, and I might be wrong, Intel agreed to change some of its business practices in Japan but their was no finding of guilt or fines imposed (that rises to the level of my neighbor complaining that my music is too loud and I lower it). So your statement that Intel uses less than legal/ethical practices is based solely on a personal opinion of what constitutes legal/ethical behavior.

And you are absolutely right that I own Intel stock and I hope to some day reap a nice return on my investment.

BTW - Brooklyn, NY, born and raise, die hard Yankee and Giants fan, hate anything from Boston (except Sam Adams Boston Lager.....love that stuff )

 

[Ca_lawman]

I agree that Schumer is looking for publicity more than anything else. He wants to prove that he's doing something other than sitting in his office doing nothing. It should be kept in mind that there is an ocean of difference between launching an investigation and bringing charges. Anyone can get investigated, even any one of us. Investigations by themselves mean nothing. Schumer and all are incensed because "the FTC told legislators tha agency is barred by law from disclosing investigations". Schumer knows this, so what is his point in getting angry that the FTC is obeying the law? Does he think that he is above the law?

Further, since the FTC has presumably investigated and has done nothing, that implies that their investigation revealed that Intel has done nothing legally wrong. To put this into perspective, think of you would feel if it was splashed all over the front pages of newspapers and on the TV for days or months on end that you were being investigated for a rape charge, then a small paragraph on page 10 finally comes out that says the investigation revealed that you were innocent? Would you be angry, outraged at the loss of your reputation? That's a major reason that investigations are not disclosed by reason of law. But Schumer, who knows all of this, doesn't care. He seeks publicity to justify his job and look good in an election campaign.

I knew there was a reason I liked you Sailer...next time I visit Mexico City, I'll pick you up a couple of fresh Habanas...

 

[purplerat]

____ has never been found guilty or admitted any guilt in any national or international court.

Insert Intel or OJ in that blank. I'm not anti-Intel (I'll be purchasing a CPU from then real soon) and I understand the way the business works. I've worked for several large companies and they all push the limits of whats legal/ethical. I don't even really have much of a problem with what Intel has been suspected of doing, but at the same time I don't have an issue with politicians keeping them in check even if it is to benefit an ailing competitor when it is to the direct benefit of the people they represent. If Schumer owned stock in AMD and it was of no benefit to the people of NY then I would probably have an issue. But I also agree that nothing will come of this other then a lot of publicity.

 

[sailer]

I knew there was a reason I liked you Sailer...next time I visit Mexico City, I'll pick you up a couple of fresh Habanas...

Sounds good to me. Either rum soaked or cherry flavored is fine.

 

[Ca_lawman]

____ has never been found guilty or admitted any guilt in any national or international court.

Insert Intel or OJ in that blank. I'm not anti-Intel (I'll be purchasing a CPU from then real soon) and I understand the way the business works. I've worked for several large companies and they all push the limits of whats legal/ethical. I don't even really have much of a problem with what Intel has been suspected of doing, but at the same time I don't have an issue with politicians keeping them in check even if it is to benefit an ailing competitor when it is to the direct benefit of the people they represent. If Schumer owned stock in AMD and it was of no benefit to the people of NY then I would probably have an issue. But I also agree that nothing will come of this other then a lot of publicity.

As Johnny Cochran said 'if the glove don't fit, you must acquit'....

Unfortunately, not everyone is as thoughtful and concerned as you and they will immediately conclude that Intel is a terrible unscrupulous corporation.....the reality is they are an incredibly competitive organization and they have the engineering and marketing talent, not to mention the money, to effectively compete and win. Like you, I'm not anti AMD, I have owned AMD processors in the past (my son still plays on my old FX57 system) and may in the future.
I think competition is healthy, but if you want to compete against the Yankees, you better bring some talent to the field. Complaining that they have too much money or that they "bought' their players is not going to win you the game. AMD hit a homerun(K8) in the top of the ninth and figured they had won the game. They forgot that Intel was coming up to bat in the bottom of the ninth with the top of the batting order. When AMD realized they had a hit on their hands is when they should have pulled out the checkbook and credit cards and brought top players on board so that they could effectively beat Intel in their own field. Instead they rested on their 1 run lead, talked garbage ("Quad Core for Dummies ") and forgot that the fat lady (no offense meant) had not sung yet. Had they done that, their success would have allowed them to pay off their debts and they would be making money today instead of going around whinning.

Sorry about the baseball analogy, I just happen to love the game as much as I love computers.

 

[sailer]

Sorry about the baseball analogy, I just happen to love the game as much as I love computers.

No problem, I'm into football and something similar could have been written using it, or tennis, or a number of sports. Its all points to the same result, you can't afford to turn lazy just because you're ahead, and AMD got lazy. I've only bought one Intel computer in the past 7 years, but I expect to be build one within the month. I'm a realist, and Intel has the best tech at the moment. I've put off a new build for nearly a year and I'm unwilling to wait for an unknown number of months for AMD to try again. Maybe AMD will get something together that works well enough to be considered in the future, but I'll let the future take care of itself.

 

[purplerat]

I think competition is healthy, but if you want to compete against the Yankees, you better bring some talent to the field. Complaining that they have too much money or that they "bought' their players is not going to win you the game. AMD hit a homerun(K8) in the top of the ninth and figured they had won the game. They forgot that Intel was coming up to bat in the bottom of the ninth with the top of the batting order. When AMD realized they had a hit on their hands is when they should have pulled out the checkbook and credit cards and brought top players on board so that they could effectively beat Intel in their own field. Instead they rested on their 1 run lead, talked garbage ("Quad Core for Dummies " ) and forgot that the fat lady (no offense meant) had not sung yet. Had they done that, their success would have allowed them to pay off their debts and they would be making money today instead of going around whinning.

Sorry about the baseball analogy, I just happen to love the game as much as I love computers.

As a huge Yankees fan I totally understand your analogy and think it fits very well. A few years ago (I think the 2002 CBA) there was a lot of push to impose competitive balance regulations in baseball, namely the Luxery Tax. Some of the people pushing for these changes were even politicians from states like Minn. whose people would directly benifet from organizations in their state being more competitive. While I don't agree with Luxery Taxes or Salary Caps, I can't blame people who would benefit from them for trying.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Right now Intel is just plain competative. Can't say the same for AMD. Intel has nothing to do with the fact that AMD is losing money faster than a cut to a major blood vessel.

I agree that it seems fishy that they are only doing it for their best interest and will probably not find enough evidence to fully charge them.

I love Intel. Always have since my first Pentium 75MHz. I like having AMD for innovation and competition. get sick of fanbois from either side. Intel is where they should be, hiting hard with a home run but AMD is not.