Wednesday, May 13th 2009
Statement by Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini on EC Ruling
Paul Otellini, Intel Corporation president and CEO today issued the following statement regarding the European Commission decision on Intel's business practices:
"Intel takes strong exception to this decision. We believe the decision is wrong and ignores the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor marketplace - characterized by constant innovation, improved product performance and lower prices. There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers. Intel will appeal."
"We do not believe our practices violated European law. The natural result of a competitive market with only two major suppliers is that when one company wins sales, the other does not. The Directorate General for Competition of the Commission ignored or refused to obtain significant evidence that contradicts the assertions in this decision. We believe this evidence shows that when companies perform well the market rewards them, when they don't perform the market acts accordingly."
"Intel never sells products below cost. We have however, consistently invested in innovation, in manufacturing and in developing leadership technology. The result is that we can discount our products to compete in a highly competitive marketplace, passing along to consumers everywhere the efficiencies of being the world's leading volume manufacturer of microprocessors."
"Despite our strongly held views, as we go through the appeals process we plan to work with the Commission to ensure we're in compliance with their decision. Finally, there should be no doubt whatsoever that Intel will continue to invest in the products and technologies that provide Europe and the rest of the world the industry's best performing processors at lower prices."
Intel's Position on the AMD Antitrust Case
Since the 1990s Intel's principal competitor has been on a concerted campaign to get regulators and courts around the world to prevent Intel from competing aggressively in the market. The aggressive marketing campaign by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has included numerous complaints to regulators in multiple jurisdictions which all stem from the same set of allegations and source. It has included a private lawsuit in the U.S. and two in Japan. By all accounts the U.S. lawsuit could become one of largest antitrust cases in the history of U.S. Courts.
AMD's objectives are clear; it is seeking price protection and wants to become more successful by deterring Intel from aggressive competition. Stripped of hyperbole AMD's complaints around the world accuse Intel of competing too aggressively by offering customers attractive prices and marketing, and technical support to win their business.
The microprocessor market is fiercely competitive. That competition has resulted in tremendous benefits to consumers worldwide by providing continuous improvement in technology innovation, performance and capability at consistently lower prices. Intel believes in competition and has never shied away from it. As you will see from information contained on this site Intel believes it operates well within the law.
More information about Intel and "Competition in the Innovation Economy" is available here.
Source:
Intel
"Intel takes strong exception to this decision. We believe the decision is wrong and ignores the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor marketplace - characterized by constant innovation, improved product performance and lower prices. There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers. Intel will appeal."
"We do not believe our practices violated European law. The natural result of a competitive market with only two major suppliers is that when one company wins sales, the other does not. The Directorate General for Competition of the Commission ignored or refused to obtain significant evidence that contradicts the assertions in this decision. We believe this evidence shows that when companies perform well the market rewards them, when they don't perform the market acts accordingly."
"Intel never sells products below cost. We have however, consistently invested in innovation, in manufacturing and in developing leadership technology. The result is that we can discount our products to compete in a highly competitive marketplace, passing along to consumers everywhere the efficiencies of being the world's leading volume manufacturer of microprocessors."
"Despite our strongly held views, as we go through the appeals process we plan to work with the Commission to ensure we're in compliance with their decision. Finally, there should be no doubt whatsoever that Intel will continue to invest in the products and technologies that provide Europe and the rest of the world the industry's best performing processors at lower prices."
Intel's Position on the AMD Antitrust Case
Since the 1990s Intel's principal competitor has been on a concerted campaign to get regulators and courts around the world to prevent Intel from competing aggressively in the market. The aggressive marketing campaign by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has included numerous complaints to regulators in multiple jurisdictions which all stem from the same set of allegations and source. It has included a private lawsuit in the U.S. and two in Japan. By all accounts the U.S. lawsuit could become one of largest antitrust cases in the history of U.S. Courts.
AMD's objectives are clear; it is seeking price protection and wants to become more successful by deterring Intel from aggressive competition. Stripped of hyperbole AMD's complaints around the world accuse Intel of competing too aggressively by offering customers attractive prices and marketing, and technical support to win their business.
The microprocessor market is fiercely competitive. That competition has resulted in tremendous benefits to consumers worldwide by providing continuous improvement in technology innovation, performance and capability at consistently lower prices. Intel believes in competition and has never shied away from it. As you will see from information contained on this site Intel believes it operates well within the law.
More information about Intel and "Competition in the Innovation Economy" is available here.
128 Comments on Statement by Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini on EC Ruling
I wouldn't be using the auto sector as an example. Were seeing whats happening in the Auto sector. Eg GM or Chrysler.
Again, I think this ruling is BS. There is no evidence that Intel bribed OEMs to NOT sell AMD. It just appears that they offered better deals that AMD couldn't match. AKA: they undercut AMD. How is that illegal?
people with that kind of problems are called criminals.
online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090513-716543.html?mg=com-wsj
and the EU has invested billions in the area called silicon saxony
www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/dec2008/gb20081222_939565.htm?site=cbs&campaign_id=djm
and doing so gives the EU a vested interest in protecting companies located there. if those companies shutdown then there are jobs lost and moved and tax dollars no longer coming in. again, notice how the fine money goes to the EU and not AMD. if anything, this will only cause intel to raise their prices, they will still control 80 percent of the market, you will pay more for chips when you buy intel and you wont have any more of a choice since AMD cant get their heads out of their collective ass.
When the system changes from " Hey George we just got fined a billion", "don't fret it Fred, just put it in the same loss column as the rest of our fines and at the end of the year the taxpayers will take care of it." to " Hey George, I'm off to jail for I don't know for what."
But lets get down to brass tacts here. When did the EU take away the power to attack "cartels" from the European commission?The EU isn't "protecting" anyone but their own pockets. It sucks a lot of people buy into their crap. But then again it shows peoples true colors.
Anyway I believe marketing practices such as undercutting the competition and destroyer pricing are illegal in the EU and not in the US. So it does not surprise me that they were fined for something in the EU which is legal in the US. I disagree with those laws that limit companies such as intel from being competitive but for now we should respect EU law because in the end they won.
It's a common practice by Intel, are you guys forgetting this one: forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=62140
Intel, do this moral (my ass...) thinking way, of doing business, for a long time, it's just a question of time an more will come to surface...
There will be more BS to come. :laugh:
Be kicked hurts :nutkick:
Yeah I'm going to look at that in the morning and think wtf.
Just another note: Why, Intel CPU's are infact, more expensive than AMD's, if they can afford selling them to OEM's at better price? ;)
Think a litte about it.
" If I got this right, the reason was to hurry the proceedings, because in the states you can stall a case untill the party dies or a company goes bankrupt. This was designed to fast track proceedings."
As for being Canadian I have already admitted in this and any other forum that we in Canada were economically taken over years ago and are the 51st state. Just ahead of Puerto Rico. So yes we also have corruption.
Man open your eyes, if you don't see it it's because you don't want to see.