backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 36 comment(s) - last by TomZ.. on Aug 25 at 11:43 AM
Henri Richard is really leaving, with an official press release and everything

AMD today officially announced the resignation of Henri Richard, chief sales and marketing officer.  Word of Richard’s resignation circulated yesterday when AMD CEO Hector Ruiz sent out an internal memo to AMD employees announcing the resignation.

“After 20 years in the PC industry – and five of the most professionally rewarding years here at AMD – I have decided to make a move to a different business segment,” Richard said. “I am leaving AMD at a time when the company is in position to break the monopoly that plagues this industry. I am immensely proud of my contribution to AMD, and in particular, of the strong team I leave behind.”

Richard is leaving AMD in September 2007, as previously reported. He is leaving AMD on good terms. AMD has not announced a successor yet, thus the global sales and marketing teams will have to report to Ruiz until a replacement is appointed.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Scary...
By JasonMick (blog) on 8/23/2007 12:21:06 PM , Rating: 2
AMD really looks to be on the way out, while Intel is dominating.

Perhaps they will pull together a substantial release with Barcelona, but things aren't looking good as they are either playing their cards way too close to their hand or else are struggling to realize what is now vaporware.

Now, for the AMD faithful, I am not bashing AMD. I think this is an extremely BAD thing for the PC market.

Imagine a world where Intel was the sole desktop PC CPU manufacturer. I really like Intel's current dual core/quad core offerings, but this is a very scary proposition.

Monopoly is only fun when its a childrens game...lets hope AMD pulls their act together, or some other chipmaker (however unlikely this is) enters the fray.




RE: Scary...
By Screwballl on 8/23/2007 12:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
AMD has been far from "on the way out".. they may have slipped since C2D has caught on but they are nowhere close to "on the way out". This is all a matter of timing.. the acquisition of ATi, the kick in the pants that came from the Conroes and the other current small issues has dropped their market share. As soon as the next gen stuff is available, I believe we will see another "Athlon64" that catches on slowly but eventually takes a large chunk from nVidia and Intel.
I love my Athlon64 and I love my Conroe systems, I am nowhere near a fanboy of any type... just call it as I see it.


RE: Scary...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/23/2007 12:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing in the Barcelona/Phenom architecture would indicate it will dominate Intel the way the A64 dominated the P4.


RE: Scary...
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 1:03:07 PM , Rating: 4
And nothing can prove that it won't be comparable until the products are benchmarked. If AMD can show comparable performace to the C2D, then I think they can stay in the game for the next few years and hope that the Fusion platform can deliver all they've promised. Only time will tell.

Vanilla


RE: Scary...
By cgrecu77 on 8/23/2007 1:12:33 PM , Rating: 2
it doesn't have to dominate like that, right now AMD has established itself as a player, even a small advantage would be enough to outsell Intel. Also, Intel will have to play fair with all the attention on their anti-competitive practices.


RE: Scary...
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 12:43:02 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, you are a fanboy - AMD has executed poorly for the past two years. What have they done right ? Just name one thing!


RE: Scary...
By omnicronx on 8/23/2007 12:57:42 PM , Rating: 2
They acquired ATI?
For those who expected AMD+ATI merger to be a powerhouse right off the get go, thats just not how business works ;). I think AMD sacrificed themselves this time around to position themselves for years to come. I am not saying the have not made mistakes, but they are far from defeated, Intel just put the afterburners on, and a smaller company with way less resources and customer loyalty is trying to keep up =(.

If intel doesn't wipe the floor with AMD with their 65nm and then 45nm processors they could be in trouble. AMD didn't invest in cmos soi technology for nothing ;) Just wait until 32nm.

On the other hand if AMD doesn't watch it, they could end up being aquired by another bigger chip maker (IBM maybe???)


RE: Scary...
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 1:19:21 PM , Rating: 5
ATI: They overpaid for an underperforming company, and they took the focus off their main business of CPUs at a critical time, during a major assault by Intel.

Better strategy: Wait a couple of years to make sure they survive to the next round. ATI wasn't going anywhere, and they probably could have picked it up cheaper later.

In addition, why did they need to own ATI to do things like Fusion? Why couldn't they have instead partnered with ATI?

Sorry, I don't see the wisdom of that acquisition, at that price, at that point in time.

And BTW, I don't see why IBM would acquire AMD. If they wanted to be in the X86 business, they would have been there through all these years. An acquisition now would make no sense.


RE: Scary...
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 2:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In addition, why did they need to own ATI to do things like Fusion? Why couldn't they have instead partnered with ATI?


I would say that having total "in-house" control of R&D would make a huge difference. Also, ATI was pretty bad about releasing products on schedule, which AMD has much more control over now. I personally think this move will prove to be beneficial to AMD in the long run, IF their roadmaps manifest into reality. Espescially with Intel having plans to get involved in the GPU arena. If AMD can do away with the need for a discrete graphics card, they've already trumped Intel's efforts.

Vanilla


RE: Scary...
By phaxmohdem on 8/23/2007 4:47:48 PM , Rating: 1
Unless we're all wandering around star ship corridors tapping on little pads that are linked to the ships central processor... I don't think the need for discrete graphics will go away.


RE: Scary...
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 5:29:22 PM , Rating: 1
That makes no sense whatsoever. What does that have to do with graphics cards? Also, if you were walking around starship corridors, there's a strong chance whatever device you're using will be using Fusion like technology, not a 8800GTX.

Vanilla


RE: Scary...
By retrospooty on 8/23/2007 6:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
" and they (AMD) took the focus off their main business of CPUs at a critical time"

Its not exactly the like the engineering crew that was working on the Athlon/Opteron lineup took a 6 month "welcome ATI to the company" break (or even a week for that matter) CPU and GPU are totally separate divisions even if the company had merged 10 years ago. The problems existed, and delays would have happened with or without the ATI purchase.


RE: Scary...
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 6:31:42 PM , Rating: 3
Of course, but wouldn't you agree that AMD could have hired a lot more more engineers, made more capital purchases, etc. with the resources for the CPU develoment that they instead invested in the ATI purchase?

Also, what about the focus of upper management? Don't you think there was a large period of time they were entirely focused on the acquisition (before, during, and after), and don't you think they spent less attention managing their CPU development as a result?


RE: Scary...
By retrospooty on 8/23/2007 9:35:11 PM , Rating: 3
Its posssible, sure. But I really remember AMD as not executing well over the past 5 years, even the A64, and X2 were way later then originally planned. At the time Intel was executing even worse, so AMD didn't look so bad. I think the only major change here is that Intel is firing on all pistons these days.


RE: Scary...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/23/2007 2:33:54 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry omni, I would have to argue that Intel is ahead of AMD in the 32nm process arena. I've heard of cutting edge intel work on the 32nm process node for years. There is also the small fact that Intel will deliver 32nm a full year ahead of AMD. Remember, Intel will be pushing for 32nm about half way through 2009.


RE: Scary...
By eyebeeemmpawn on 8/23/2007 1:29:34 PM , Rating: 1
IMHO, buying ATI is something they did right. I know, I'm crazy right? Maybe it isn't clear to those who track a company's success by their current stock price. Chips aren't designed and brought to acceptable yield on quarterly basis; it will take years to see the advantages that AMD hopes to gain from the ATI purchase. (omnicronx, I see you've already taken the words out of my mouth :) )

As an EE Design engineer, (not affiliated with Intel, AMD or IBM any longer) I see the acquisition as the next logical step in shrinking the PC platform. This is a bold move in a day and age where companies are rolling heads to keep investors happy in the short term. Their shortsightedness is only crippling their chances at future successes.

BTW, TomZ, your post makes you seem incredibly hypocritical.


RE: Scary...
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 2:11:15 PM , Rating: 2
I'm being critical, not hypocritical. I didn't indicate any preference for Intel in my commetns, did I?

My views are like a lot of others who post here - I want to see both companies being successful. If one is doing a good job, we say "good job," and if one is doing a bad job, we say "bad job."


RE: Scary...
By eyebeeemmpawn on 8/23/2007 4:31:07 PM , Rating: 2
(rolls eyes)...whatever you say. Screwball didn't indicate a preference for either company in his post, yet he/she earned a "fanboy" from you...I guess we're both guilty :)

I too would like to see Intel and AMD competing head-to-head in the future. We'd all be better off, thanks for stating the obvious.

I named one thing I think they did right, and your lack of an argument to the contrary in your response indicates to me that you may agree with me.

Wait longer? Partnership? Your suggestions of a "better strategy" for AMD show clearly that you are missing the whole point of the acquisition.

I think (my opinion, no personal attack) you're shortsighted to jump on the bandwagon with the Corporate Baseball Card annalists and say "bad job" when the fruits of the purchase have yet to be seen. You've got to spend money to make money. AMD saw an opportunity and they put a whole lot of money where their mouth is. Hopefully, for our sake, it works out.


RE: Scary...
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 4:57:43 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, my post was a slight overreaction, but I was reacting to his/her baseless statement that AMD will take a bunch of marketshare away from Intel and nVIDIA, even though there is absolutely no indication this could possibly happen, based on what we understand of current and future product plans. He/she then defened that view, claiming a complete lack of bias, which is what I was calling out.

My whole point with the AMD/ATI thing is that ATI is an investment that AMD could not afford, not in terms of time, money, or focus. I totally agree with you that it might have benefits in a 5-10 year timeframe, and I understand the need for AMD to think in those timelines, but I feel like they put way too much at risk with that deal.

They did that acquisition at the same time they woke the sleeping giant, who rose from its nap and declared "open season" on AMD. In those conditions, they should have focused 150% on their core offerings, especially since they knew they were already disadvantaged in terms of capital, manufacturing, brand, etc. The result of not focusing where they should have is that they quickly lost their hard-won market share gains, with seemingly no end to the pummeling in sight. That is not a good situation at all for AMD!

In my opinion, this strategic mistake is bad enough that AMD shareholders should demand the resignations of all of the top management.

I guess time will tell.