[AMD did not shrink in response to Intel's response.] Our case is about how they abuse their monopoly to lock in the market share and artificially high prices, ... For them to suggest they're the price competition leader in the industry and that we want higher prices--that's Alice in Wonderland. |
[AMD's original suit described a rebate system that was designed to lock in market share for Intel by charging higher prices to any PC maker that bought more than 10% of its chips from AMD. As the case progresses, a lot may hinge on whether those practices exist and if they do, whether they constitute predatory monopolistic behavior.] It's a false rebate. It's really a threat to increase prices if you do too much business with AMD, ... Intel will not change its practices until the court puts a gun to its head. |
not surprising considering what they are trying to hide, but the facts of illegal monopoly abuse are clear and undeniable. |
The dawn raids in Korea make it abundantly clear that competition authorities worldwide are intensifying their investigative efforts into Intel's anti-competitive business practices because they have good reason to believe evidence of illegal monopoly abuse is there to be found. |
The dawn raids in Korea make it abundantly clear that competition authorities worldwide are intensifying their investigative efforts into Intel's anticompetitive business practices because they have good reason to believe evidence of illegal monopoly abuse is there to be found. |
There is a very small circle of world-class technology economists, and both sides know who they are. |
Today's court ruling sends the message that the truth about Intel's illegal monopoly abuse will soon see the light of day. |