backtop


Print 65 comment(s) - last by crystal clear.. on Oct 11 at 5:32 AM

One company will design chips, the other will manufacture them

It’s no secret that AMD has been in trouble lately.  Despite gaining a commanding position in the graphics industry, the chipmaker giant has been beaten by Intel in the microprocessor market.  With AMD's first 45 nm product, Shanghai, forced to try to enter the market at the same time as Intel's second generation 45 nm Nehalem, and with consist quarterly losses something had to be done.

Today AMD announced a shocking decision that will rock the computer industry -- in order to try to stay competitive, it is splitting in two.  From the ashes of AMD will rise two companies. One will design chips and keep the brand name.  The other, officially named the Foundry Company, will manufacture chips.  The two companies will work closely together, but be independent.

The move also came with good news -- two Abu Dhabi companies have elected to inject at least $5.7B USD into the pair of companies.  Most of this money will go to the Foundry Company, which will use it to build a new factory in Albany, N.Y., and to upgrade its Dresden, Germany factory.

AMD retains a 44.4 percent stake in the new company.  The majority ownership belongs to Advanced Technology Investment Company.  Advanced Technology, a company created by Abu Dhabi's wealthy government, has promised immediate investment of $2.1B USD into the pair.  It says it will follow this with an additional investment that could be anywhere from $3.6B to $6B USD.  Despite the majority stake, Advanced Technology consented to have an equal number of votes as AMD on the Foundry Company's board.

Advanced Technology isn't the only Abu Dhabi company to want a big piece of the AMD pie either.  Mubadala Development Company, which bought an 8 percent stake in AMD last November, will pay $314M USD to buy 58 million shares of AMD stock, to bring its stake in the presplit company to 19.3 percent.  Mubadala and Advanced Technology, despite being competitors in some respects, worked together closely on the new deal.

Khaldoon Al Mubarak, chief executive of Mubadala, states, "We generally believe this deal is a game changer for the industry.  It’s bold, and I think it’s smart."

Waleed al-Mokarrab, chairman of Advanced Technology added about AMD's recent struggles, "Yes, it is a cyclical business, but over time the trajectory is always upwards"

The AMD move is a bit of a shock to the electronics industry, but not an entire surprise.  The company recently announced it was $5.3B USD in debt, with only $1.6B USD of cash on hand.  AMD’s chief executive, Dirk Meyer, said the timing was right to turn for help.  He stated, "This is the biggest announcement in our history.  This will make us a financially stronger company, both in the near term and in the long term, as a result of being out from the capital expense burden we have had to bear."

Before AMD can be officially split up, the deal must meet regulatory and shareholder scrutiny.  The deal is expected to be complete by 2009.  The newly spawned Foundry Company will produce chips for others besides AMD.  It will also compete with the independent Asian foundry firms such as TSMC

The split may strike some as a bit ironic as AMD’s co-founder and longtime chief executive, W. J. Sanders III, known as Jerry, once quipped "real men have fabs", according to company lore.  New CEO Mr. Meyer referenced the joke stating, "We feel like we’re still pretty manly at AMD.  Frankly, the math has changed."

The Foundry Company at launch will control AMD's two chip foundries in Dresden, Germany.  One is in need of an upgrade to make modern chips.  Plans will continue to build the larger state-of-the-art Malta, N.Y. foundry, which will cost $3.2B USD.  The state of New York is offering the new company $1.2B USD in incentives to build the plant, as it will employ 1,400 workers.  The Foundry Company will assume $1.2B USD, or roughly a quarter, of AMD's debt



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Terrorist support
By darkweasel on 10/7/2008 10:29:39 AM , Rating: 5
I don't think the UAE is supporting terrorists. Big oil isn't really "gouging" us either. We are just paying market price for oil. You like free markets yes?

And I'm sure Intel has some middle eastern investors as well, so unless you lump all people from the middle east into the "terrorist" camp, then you really can't buy either.

In fact, after China I believe the rich middle eastern oil countries are our nation's biggest creditors.


RE: Terrorist support
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/7/2008 10:35:36 AM , Rating: 3
Japan is our largest creditor for the record.


RE: Terrorist support
By Clauzii on 10/7/2008 11:37:39 AM , Rating: 3
Yep:
"Japan ($583 billion) and China ($503 billion, less the debt to Hong Kong and Macao) are the key creditors for the United States, accounting for over 40 percent of the state debt on aggregate. What’s more, the debt to China goes up by 25 percent a year.

Other major creditors of the United States are Britain, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Switzerland, states of Caribbean offshore zone and the oil-exporting states, including Venezuela, the United Arab Emirates, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman and others.

With the private sector taken into account, the U.S. foreign debt totaled $13.77 trillion as of early April, while the country’s GDP is projected to equal $14.4 trillion this year. The U.S. foreign debt didn’t exceed $6.95 trillion in 2003.

The share of foreign governments in the U.S. state debt widened from 52.6 percent in 2003 to 73.9 percent in 2007."

(from kommersant.com)

Now, if they could just find those $2.3 Trillion...


RE: Terrorist support
By on 10/7/2008 11:49:01 AM , Rating: 2
What 2.3 trillion. Thanks for sharing the source.


RE: Terrorist support
By Fronzbot on 10/7/2008 12:35:13 PM , Rating: 2
It's another FITCamaro attempted impersonator!

And the roughly $2.3 trillion we spend every year- don't really need a source on that one as most intelligent people know what you're talking about. . .


RE: Terrorist support
By Clauzii on 10/7/2008 6:57:45 PM , Rating: 2
Rumsfeld @ Pentagon, Sept. 10th, 2001...


RE: Terrorist support
By FITCamaro on 10/7/2008 10:56:10 AM , Rating: 1
Exactly. Gas prices have been going down as oil has been dropping. I've heard in Oklahoma it's like $2.70 a gallon. Now I do agree that right in certain areas (my own included), we are possibly being gouged. I'm paying $3.57 for regular when in New York its $3.49 and they have higher state taxes. I want to know why such huge price disparities exist right now. Yes I know Ike messed up production in Texas but cmon. It's been a few weeks. When Katrina hit, prices were back down in a week.


RE: Terrorist support
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/7/2008 11:00:08 AM , Rating: 2
FIT it's about the same down here in the Washintgon DC area, its about 3.54 regular.


RE: Terrorist support
By voodooboy on 10/7/2008 11:28:38 AM , Rating: 2
I've always felt that D.C's been a rip-off. Especially as a student, the difference between NoVA and DC is pretty glaring (and it's not like NoVA is cheap or soemthing...)even though they're right next to each other.


RE: Terrorist support
By Aloonatic on 10/7/2008 11:22:25 AM , Rating: 2
In the UK prices rarely fall (if ever) as quickly as they rise.

It's good to see that you guys are (on the whole) being treated fairly at least.

Most of the problems we have with gas prices here are muddied by the high amounts of tax we pay and so both the oil companies and government can point their fingers at each other and say that it's the others fault.

BTW, A friend of mine lives in Atlanta and he was saying that there was some kind of supply problem which has lead to half the gas stations around his way being closed?

That was about a week ago I suppose? What's going on?

Oh and I'm paying £1.10 a litre for regular petrol here :)


RE: Terrorist support
By Reclaimer77 on 10/7/2008 11:46:28 AM , Rating: 2
Crude oil prices have gone down 40%, but we have NOT seen a 40% price drop at the pumps.

I don't really know what that means really.. just a random fact.

quote:
Yes I know Ike messed up production in Texas but cmon. It's been a few weeks. When Katrina hit, prices were back down in a week.


Katrina only took out refineries in L.A. Ike took out refineries in Texas AND Louisiana. Where I live in lower North Carolina there are STILL many stations without gas here and in upstate South Carolina.


RE: Terrorist support
By Jedi2155 on 10/7/2008 3:53:05 PM , Rating: 2
Its suppose to take a few weeks (3-5) after the prices on the oil market to reach the consumers....so I expect lower prices by the end of October...but probably not less than $3 in California.


RE: Terrorist support
By on 10/7/2008 11:47:26 AM , Rating: 2
Its the free market stupid. This is a good way to improve profits since you lower prices at a slower curve than your costs. Wouldn't you do the same? That may be one reason but another more important reason probably is that gasoline buying is done in contracts (like RAM?) so the prices is fixed from the supplier for a certain duration. Also, as you allude to, NY has higher state taxes on gas, higher than here in MA even.


RE: Terrorist support
By dreddly on 10/7/2008 11:01:53 AM , Rating: 4
While the terrorist comment is stupid, the market alone has little to do with the price of oil. Speculation, swaps, futures and perception have dramatically complicated anything resembling supply and demand.

I think there is a point to be made about the transfer of wealth through market-based support for the OPEC system and the oligopolistic control of oil through companies with record-breaking profits.

This transfer of wealth has benefited these investors, and we should be able to recognize that this money has been extracted from our collective pockets and placed into the hands of a very small few in a Autocratic region of the world.

This investment in AMD should be recognized as a consequence of this, and how these market-based solutions are directly allowing foreign control of advanced technology and its development.


RE: Terrorist support
By sweetsauce on 10/7/2008 11:22:47 AM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure oil companies having record profits while claiming they are paying more for oil kind of makes your whole "free market" argument pointless. If anything the profits should've remained the same while prices get higher no? I'm probably using common sense, sorry if that disturbs you. Besides, for a necessary thing like gasoline, there is no free market. We require gasoline, its not a luxury, and a few companies can charge whatever they want because we have no choice but to buy it.


RE: Terrorist support
By BansheeX on 10/7/2008 11:45:12 AM , Rating: 4
Depends on how you're measuring. If you're measuring in dollars, inflation will send nominal profits upwards so that practically every year you're breaking nominal records. Measuring in terms of real purchasing power, though, the profits may not be that impressive. You could be posting record profits year over year the same way a loaf of bread went from 10 cents to $3 the past 70 years. Nominal records mean nothing, relative value means everything.

One thing is for certain, the U.S. government revenue from taxing gas and oil companies eclipses the profits of the oil companies themselves, and they're not the ones out surveying and drilling and reinvesting. They'll blow it on a failed bank, a useless war, a bridge in the middle of nowhere, overpaid contractors, a study on grizzly bear populations, you name it. You have no idea how much crazy, collusive pork is out there. They're also the ones causing the dollar debasement which is driving up foreign demand. Oil price doesn't increase long-term by companies to ream consumers, or there never would have been all those years of cheap oil to begin with. And they don't increase from speculators, short term trading causes volatility, but at the end of the day the long-term trends are driven by supply and demand. That's why oil dropped $60, but we're still higher than we were two years ago. It's called a bull market.


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki