Wednesday, May 13th 2009
EU Fines Intel a Record €1.06 Billion in Antitrust Case
Following the news we covered the other day, the verdict is now in, and as expected Intel has been found guilty and fined €1.06 Billion ($1.45b/£948m) by the European Commission for anti-competitive practices. This fine smashes the €497 million fine issued to Microsoft by the EU in 2004 for abusing its dominant market position. Nine years on from when AMD first made a complaint that Intel had paid computer manufacturers not to use AMD chips in Europe the EU have ruled that Intel had given rebates to manufacturer's if they only used their chips, and had also found that a retailer had been paid to sell only Intel based systems.
"Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."
Source:
BBC
"Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."
77 Comments on EU Fines Intel a Record €1.06 Billion in Antitrust Case
If you don't want news to be open to discussion, close the threads. I think a news this important deserves an open discussion, with somewhat deeper remarks then just the traditional "serves them right!".
I will just say one last thing, then I will not post on this thread anymore. I have other posts in other threads, people actually considered me helpful. I don't have that many posts, you can check them.
About what I want to say, on the topic. An exclusivity contract is an exclusivity contract. You get rebates because you are exclusive (by definition). If you don't want to be exclusive, no problem, but you don't get the rebate, you pay the full price. There is no mention that the ones that wouldn't be exclusive would pay anything on top of the full price.
Anyway, smarter people then me (us) made the decision. And their decision is final (pending appeal). So that is it. Over and out.
Don not sell AMD products and you will get rebates with our products. Thats not a legal contract and this is what everything is about.
I'm sure I don't need to explain how bad it would be for the consumers if Intel was the only company in the x86 market? Stagnant market, no innovation, a company that can set WHATEVER price it wants. That is very bad for us.
Whatever you think of the A-C laws, what Intel did was against the law, they set out to force AMD out of business by forcing the OEMs, and smaller business to buy their products via various means. That is illegal, therefore they should be punished.
Suck it Intel. :D
All of you realise that we are paying for these crimes right now, don't you?
These anti-competitive practices were happening back in the days when AMD had processors that could actually compete with Intel's across the board. Because Intel limited and restricted the amount of AMD CPUs that were sold (and sold more of their own), AMD had less money to spend on R&D (and Intel had more). Consequently Intel comes out with Core 2 & i7 & AMD have fallen behind.
Imagine if AMD had had more $$ to research better CPUs? We might have been at a point now where AMD's Phenoms were competing with the i7. Therefore the i7 would probably be a damn sight cheaper. But they're not. We lose. We're stuck paying $1000+ for extreme series processors cause they have nothing to compete against. We lose.
If i were the Intel CEO, i ought to be thinking something like this: "Outstanding!! We've crippled the competition severely and only have this to pay!"
For Intel, doing this payed off :mad:
W1zzard is right. In this conspiracy, Intel ended up gaining more than what the fine imposed attempts to put a stop to. In essence, all these years of proven malpractices were worth it, despite the fine. 1.06 B Euro really is peanuts at the macro-level. All these repercussions IMO are image cleanup, and sympathy harvest that automatically follow such judgements, in order to cushion the stock-price, and preventing a trench.
People here are getting riled up about how huge the fine is. €1,060,000,000 is a LOT of money to you, me, and Fred next door; but to Intel, who are worth €85,000,000,000+, it is nothing more than a kick in the nuts. It'll hurt for a bit, and the shareholders will be pissy come the AGM, but they'll get back up and keep riding the wave of the better products they could afford to research with the extra money that these crimes generated.
IMHO, a $20 billion fine would be a start ...
There's a way to counter this, though: have EVERYBODY (countries) fine Intel. If so, Intel wouldn't stop selling everywhere, would they?
Still, how much do you think AMD lost?
If Intel hadn't done this, do you agree that AMD would have a better market share of the CPU market?
Let's imagine that AMD would have 15% more market share then it currently has: how much do you think that is worth? A TON more then the fine and don't forget to multiply that figure by the years this was going on ...
Since the EU can't go after Intel the way they should, the combined fine (total from all the countries) should make a more realistic number: this way, Intel would be properly fined for it's dirty business practices.
1./ Implement a CPU with "licensed" not purchased microcode
2./ Annual fee of $10 to use, just like a road-tax license imposed by governments. The fee could be "waived" at the discretion of Intel, unless
3./ They get dicked around, in which case, the fee becomes due for immediate payment, else
4./ CPUs stop working as soon as they phone home through the internet
Part 4 works if the CPU needs to dial home once in a while to validate the license, otherwise, they expire.
is not only Intel fault;the companies who has bought with special rebates are guilty also; they have charged the final consumer with a high profit margin;they deserve also to be fined
I mean, it's not like Intel didn't break the law, and I'm all for breaking bad corporate practices, but with the economy being as bad as it is, do you really think its necessary to rule a fine so high? I know it wont put Intel out of bussiness neither, but in times like this when PC sales are down overall (even Atom shipments have decreased by 33% this quarter) do you have to necessarily beat them to the ground? (even tough Intel has enough cash to pay the fine...).
The point is they were found guilty by a jury and all, and they certainly have to pay for it and stop these practices immediately; but how do they determine consumers in general have been affectted to the tune of one billion euros by their practices?
Besides, is this money going to be used to benefit the consumers in the end? What will the EU do with all this money? Send relief checks to anyone who bought a PC in Europe in the last 10 years?
Just my two cents...
And don't worry about Intel, they've got about 10 billion in cash, so this fine is peanuts for them.
To all the people whining about the socialist EU who is just subsidizing AMD's EU plants, read the news: Intel is likely to face similar charges in the US as well, oh and I forgot they've been already found guilty of unsound business practice elsewhere...