Intel compra ATI?

[UnReal]

FIDELITY.COM runs a rum rumour to the effect that Intel (tick: INTC) could bid $23 for ATI to woo it away from an AMD takeover.

That rumour would put the cat among the pigeons if there's any truth to it at all.

ATI's board agreed unanimously to recommend AMD's bid with an offer per share of $20.47 totalling $5.4 billion. AMD has to borrow money to complete the acquisition, which is subject to shareholder approval.

The rumour is here. Mind you, Intel is the leader in the graphics market. Would the fact that only Nvidia and S3 be left interest the antitrust authorities. µ

* FORBES quotes an RBC analyst saying there is "little upside" to ATI's share price unless there are competing bids. here. Nvidia and Intel would have antitrust "challenges". TI and Broadcom wouldn't have that problem, the article reckons.

Fonte: The Inquirer

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=108623

http://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/goto/evaluate/news/basicNewsStory.jhtml?symbols=AMD&product=JGN/JGN&provider=CBSMW&storyid=NEWS.CBSMW.81585B6240384B068769.3EC55BFF2305

Então e agora?

Bem, a fonte da noticia não é grande coisa.

Mas a ser verdade, a Intel está apenas a tentar subir o preço ou planeia mesmo comprar a ATI?

Mas vendo bem, não me parece verdade pois os sites da AMD e ATI já foram actualizados com a noticia, etc.

Cumps

[Ridelight]

A mim pareçe-me treta, não tinha lógica nenhuma se fosse verdade !

[deathseeker25]

Eu acho que é vapouware por razões simples: se a Intel queria lançar uma contra-OPA então já o deveria ter feito antes da ATI e AMD estabelecerem acordo. Ainda é possível que tal aconteça, pois o negócio não está de modo algum fechado, mas a compra da ATI pela Intel iria enfraquecer a competição. Teríamos um super-gigante nas gráficas e nos processadores, contra um gigante nos processadores e outro nas gráficas a competirem individualmente. Seria injusto para o mercado e para a evolução e mau para os consumidores.

Depois, encontrei esta notícia num site especializado:http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3524.

Para além disso, se fosse um TGDaily a lançar a notícia eu até ponderava no assunto, agora o The Inquirer a lançar tudo oficialmente... 😄

Vamos esperar para ver mais pormenores desta telenovela. Nos posts seguintes vou fazer uns quotes a alguns artigos que encontrei nesta pesquisa.

[deathseeker25]

Intel isn't happy with ATi

According to Rahul Sood (president and CTO of VoodooPC, Intel are not happy with ATi at all.

On Rahul's blog he mentions

"So, there’s an upcoming launch event for Conroe as many of you know. We’re very excited to launch our Conroe systems at the event – and we were supposed to have a system on stage with ATi. Apparently this isn’t happening anymore – ATi has been removed from the event and I suspect that Intel is changing the configurations of all the machines based on the feedback I’ve been hearing. I don’t understand the reasoning behind this - because we all know that ATi Crossfire works on the 975 chipset and there’s no doubt in my mind that we will sell a ton of Crossfire configurations with Intel Core 2 Duo. ATi will continue to make chipsets for Conroe configurations (at least for the current generation) so it’s too bad it had to end like this."

This is an early indicator that already Intel is, understandably, not happy that ATi chose to merge with AMD. This also backs up conflicting reports about Intel severing contracts with ATi. Let the fight begin.

Fonte: Rahul Sood's Blog

É como o blogger diz: Let the fight begin... 😄

[deathseeker25]

Sources of Intel ATI Takeover Bid Rumor Shaky at Best

Incredibly, The Inquirer has picked up another outlandish rumor that appears borderline fraudulent. Cher Price is the author of an article on the site claiming Intel could bid $23 per share in a separate takeover bid of ATYT, or ATI Technologies for us technical folks. The rumor is partially visible on Fidelity's AMD portfolio site here, claiming the following in its entirety:

Jul 25, 2006 (JAGfn.com via COMTEX) -- (ATYT) (INTC) (AMD) Rumor that ATI TECHNOLOGIES INC (ATYT) will get a $23 bid from (INTC) over current (AMD) bid.

JagNotes, for those who do not remember the dot-bomb era as well as I do, was a horrible example of what could go wrong with a dot com site. The site spun off JagFN.com, which was to be the network's live broadcast website with news commentary and analysis. Unfortunately, JagFN.com has been defunct for at least four years now, and JagNotes became a little more than a link aggregator during that time as well. JagFN.com and JagFN.tv are now a CPC link farms.

Yet that has not stopped whoever is operating JagFN.com to continue to submit news wires to feeds. The owners of JagFN.com, Popular Enterprises LLC, are also the proud owners of link farms located at web---sites.com and clickclickonline.com. Our friends at The Register have a few choice words Popular Enterprises.

JagFN.com has made a number of dubious claims over the past few months:

July 13, 2006: Johnson & Johnson will make a $35 bid for Bristol Myers Squibb

July 5, 2006: Microsoft will make a bid for RealNetworks

November 10, 2005: Qualcomm will make a $30 bid for Interdigital

June 23, 2005: Patterson-UTI Energy will make a $12 bid for Grey Wolf

For some people who actually track some of these companies, not only are these rumors unsubstantiated, they are downright asinine. Searching the Yahoo Financial forums for JagFN alone yields dozens of claims (none of which have been correct since 2002) of takeover bids -- the new owners of JagFN seem to only publish rumors with regard to takeovers. JagFN used to report these sorts of stories when it was a legitimate news outlet, but over the last two years it seems there is a clear indication that the JagFN "feed" is nothing more than a very small entity attempting to stir up headlines for its own purposes.

DailyTech attempted to contact JagNotes for any comment on the relation between JagNotes and the JagFN feeds, but we did not receive a reply from the company. The JagNotes front page has the ATI rumor listed, though we were not able to read the full article without paying the company $100, which we declined.

Fonte: DailyTech

Afinal foi o JagNotes que lançou a notícia antes do The Inquirer... 😄 Uma questão de timmings, mas que é importante referir...

[deathseeker25]

First, let's get rid of all the lawyers

At the same time AMD approached ATI, Bergman said, "The executive team of ATI went through a strategic process, and looked at the future of computing, and how can we maximize the growth and innovation within our company. Certainly, we could have continued on our current path, and grown our consumer business aggressively. But actually, when AMD approached us, we said, 'Wow, there's a lot of things that make sense.'"

But why wouldn't something on the order of an exclusive strategic alliance have made even more sense? Couldn't two companies have agreed on participating in developing a joint platform, without all the burden of splicing their operating units together?

"We actually considered that, and considered other opportunities as well," responded AMD's Speed. "We could have developed our own chipset capabilities internally, or we could have formed some kind of partnership or alliance or licensing arrangements for a third party graphics chipset. But the customers really wanted one company, and one point of contact, to be responsible for the delivery of the solution. Then longer-term, ultimately we believe that there is going to be some silicon integration - not right away, but in the future - where we would have had to own the IP to really make that successful."

Ah, to cite something one of Shakespeare's endangered lawyers may have said, there's the rub. It isn't so much that AMD wanted to own ATI's intellectual property. It's that the licensing of IP would have been a pain in the neck. "There are things that AMD could be innovating if we had access to the GPU IP," Speed admitted, "whether that's innovating in a discrete fashion or innovating in an integrated fashion - meaning, putting it on the same piece of silicon. In our long-term plan, we knew we needed to have access to the GPU IP.

"Let's say there's something AMD wanted to do, and needed the third-party licensing company to implement for us," Speed said hypothetically. "We would have had to go back and negotiate, 'How much is that going to cost?' and [say], 'Gosh, that doesn't really fit with our development plans; we're really going in this direction strategically, and the direction you're wanting us to go is not in line, so we'll get to it when we get to it...' This [merger] allows us to integrate the visions by integrating the companies, and then align the development resources around the common goals."

It could therefore literally be seen as a cost-cutting move for two companies, rather than go through all the bother and expense of licensing each other's technologies to one another, to just merge and get it over with. Furthermore, as Speed pointed out here, when two companies form a partnership or joint venture, their diverging interests often get in the way. It's sometimes better to simply sew those interests together, one way or the other.

Fonte: TGDaily

Esta artigo demonstra que as patentes foram, na verdade, um dos aspectos que mais peso teve na fusão AMD-ATI... 😄

[deathseeker25]

AMD, ATI Merge to Form DAAMIT

Sunnyvale, CA - AMD CEO Hector Ruiz said that with the merger of AMD with ATI the new company would be called DAAMIT.

"We wanted to keep the letters from each company, but didn't like the looks of AMDATI. It lacks imagination. Our marketing team found DAAMIT appealed most to our focus groups," said Ruiz.

Ruiz noted that DAAMIT is an ancient Incan word meaning "fleet of foot, speedy." He said, "That's the kind of company that we want to be."

A representative from Intel chuckled when told of the new name, "We applaud this as a bold move by the company. We can't wait to see what they do next."

Customers were pleased by the move. "That's what I usually say when I load new drivers on my system, so it seems appropriate," said Kyle Westfall of Wausau, Wisconsin.

When asked if the company would continue its focus on the gaming market Ruiz said, "Yes, if people think of gaming, we want them to think DAAMIT!"

Rumors that DAAMIT will make fully integrated computers not compatible with third party hardware brought threats of litigation from Apple for patent infringement.

DAAMIT's stock was down on the news.

Fonte: BBSpot

Esta está do melhor.... 😁

[Ridelight]

Lol, isso não quer dizer "porra" ou "lixem-se"  ?

Essa notiçia é troça...

[deathseeker25]

Lol, isso não quer dizer "porra" ou "lixem-se"  ?

Essa notiçia é troça...

Sim eu sei que é troça. Mas achei engraçado postar... 😄

[UnReal]

Teríamos um super-gigante nas gráficas e nos processadores, contra um gigante nos processadores e outro nas gráficas a competirem individualmente.

Isso da ATI ser um super-gigante e a nVidia ser "só" um gigante não me parece que seja assim. Sinceramente nem sei qual é que estará melhor posicionada neste momento, mas de qualquer maneira a diferença não é muita.

Já na batalha AMD vs Intel, aí sim acredito que a Intel seja um super-gigante comparando com a AMD. Mesmo quando a AMD tinha melhores processadores, a Intel dominava quanto mais agora...

Como já disse na outra thread gostaria de ver um AMD/ATI vs Intel/nVidia.

E, também acho que, mais cedo ou mais tarde, as duas empresas que ficarem "livres" (aparentemente Intel e nVidia) vão acabar por também juntar-se.

EDIT: Reparei agora numa pequena curiosidade dita na TechzonePT:  A Sonae ofereceu sensivelmente o dobro pela PT daquilo que a AMD vai pagar pela ATI.

Não confirmo nem desminto porque não faço a minima, mas a ser verdade  ?  ?

Cumps