Support NeoGAF

[Funky Papa]

I think Intel has been killing it in the desktop market for the past few years, but at the same time, I have to wonder if this is not the result of burying AMD with terrible practices. It's hard not to look good when your competition is scrapping the bottom of the barrel.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/us-intel-court-eu-idUSKBN0EN0M120140612

(Reuters) - U.S. chipmaker Intel lost on Thursday its challenge against a record 1.06 billion euro ($1.44 billion) European Union fine handed down five years ago, as Europe's second highest court said regulators did not act too harshly.

The European Commission in its 2009 decision said Intel tried to thwart rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) by giving rebates to PC makers Dell, Hewlett-Packard Co, NEC and Lenovo for buying most of their computer chips from Intel.

The EU competition authority said Intel also paid German retail chain Media Saturn Holding to stock only computers with its chips.

Judges at the Luxembourg-based General Court said on Thursday they backed the Commission's decision.

"The Commission demonstrated to the requisite legal standard that Intel attempted to conceal the anti-competitive nature of its practices and implemented a long term comprehensive strategy to foreclose AMD from the strategically most important sales channels," the court said in a near 300-page decision.

Judges said the EU watchdog had not been heavy-handed with the level of the fine, equal to 4.15 percent of Intel's 2008 turnover, versus a possible maximum of 10 percent. While Commission penalties rarely hit the top figure, the rising level of fines is a source of worry for many companies.

"The General Court considers that none of the arguments raised by Intel supports the conclusion that the fine imposed is disproportionate. On the contrary, it must be considered that that fine is appropriate in the light of the facts of the case," judges said.

Spoiler

I am all for bailing out the EU with money taken from the pockets of awful corporations

 

[Joni]

Another win for the EU.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want. They can give rebates because of consumer demand. Make your cups better and people will buy them too amd

 

[Funky Papa]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want.

Did you even bother reading the bolded?

Just the bolded.

 

[Joni]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want.

If AMD can't sell their products, Intel doesn't need to bother to make good hardware.

 

[Maninthemirror]

If AMD can't sell their products, Intel doesn't need to bother to make good hardware.

The performance perception is so apparent, in the age that the custom built pcs is all people are buying and pre made pcs are in a downfall, you can see for yourself. I dont think its malpractice for intel to provide rebates because they get performance and price as well now out of their products unlike before

 

[LQX]

What does the EU do with all the money they get from fining American companies?

 

[Funky Papa]

What does the EU do with all the money they get from fining American companies?

Greasing lazy French farmers.

So I've been told by Farage.

 

[Joni]

The performance perception is so apparent, in the age that the custom built pcs is all people are buying and pre made pcs are in a downfall, you can see for yourself. I dont think its malpractice for intel to provide rebates because they get performance and price as well now out of their products unlike before

If their product is that good, they can let it speak for themselves and they don't need to pay companies not to stock AMD. You're applauding anti-consumer practices.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

We really have to get out of the EU.

 

[twobear]

We really have to get out of the EU.

Yep, it's truly appalling that they're standing up to the sleazy business practices of major corporations.

 

[HI. BILLY MAYS HERE]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want. They can give rebates because of consumer demand. Make your cups better and people will buy them too amd

The performance perception is so apparent, in the age that the custom built pcs is all people are buying and pre made pcs are in a downfall, you can see for yourself. I dont think its malpractice for intel to provide rebates because they get performance and price as well now out of their products unlike before

Cringe worthy and it's only 8am

 

[-COOLIO-]

If their product is that good, they can let it speak for themselves and they don't need to pay companies not to stock AMD. You're applauding anti-consumer practices.

bingo

 

[Guevara]

The EU court system is so awesome.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want. They can give rebates because of consumer demand. Make your cups better and people will buy them too amd

The performance perception is so apparent, in the age that the custom built pcs is all people are buying and pre made pcs are in a downfall, you can see for yourself. I dont think its malpractice for intel to provide rebates because they get performance and price as well now out of their products unlike before

I do wonder if people really understand the world that they are living in.

 

[Funky Papa]

If their product is that good, they can let it speak for themselves and they don't need to pay companies not to stock AMD. You're applauding anti-consumer practices.

This is the thing. They were paying companies not to stock AMD, which released slighly slower CPUs (but still powerful enough) at more competitive prices. Retailers and PC manufacturers didn't care that much since, hey, clients need to buy a computer anyway, be it Intel or AMD, so losing AMD's sales in exchange for Intel's wasn't something costly for them.

As a result of these practices AMD hemorrhaged sales and money, leaving them in their current, sorry state. AMD chips are no longer competitive in no small part because Intel's moves decimated their sales and deprived the company of the money they needed to fund future products.

 

[Abounder]

Does the money go to AMD or can they sue Intel and win some $? Will Intel appeal again?

Anyway a healthy AMD/competition is the world I want to buy in

 

[hodgy100]

This is the thing. They were paying companies not to stock AMD, which released slighly slower CPUs (but still powerful enough) at more competitive prices. Retailers and PC manufacturers didn't care that much since, hey, clients need to buy a computer anyway, be it Intel or AMD, so losing AMD's sales in exchange for Intel's wasn't something costly for them.

As a result of these practices AMD hemorrhaged sales and money, leaving them in their current, sorry state. AMD chips are no longer competitive in no small part because Intel's moves decimated their sales and deprived the company of the money they needed to fund future products.

The athlon was actually quite a bit faster than intel's P4's at the time this was going on. which is what makes intels practice so bad. they were blocking the better product from consumers.

 

[Funky Papa]

The athlon was actually quite a bit faster than intel's P4's at the time this was going on. which is what makes intels practice so bad. they were blocking the better product from consumers.

Yeah, those Athlons were among the best CPUs ever made by AMD. I upgraded from a K6-2 (with 3D Now! OMFGBBQ!) and the difference was massive. It was all downhill since then.

 

[IISANDERII]

Terrible decision, intel is making better hardware plain and simple. If amd was making cpu's nearly as good as intel then this would be legitimate because its what consumers want. They can give rebates because of consumer demand. Make your cups better and people will buy them too amd

You misread; it's not what consumers want.

 

[ambientmystic]

The athlon was actually quite a bit faster than intel's P4's at the time this was going on. which is what makes intels practice so bad. they were blocking the better product from consumers.

Yeah, that was the best and last chance AMD had to wrest away the performance crown from Intel. Intel was still reeling from their Preshawt revision to the P4 at the time.

 

[CrunchyB]

The athlon was actually quite a bit faster than intel's P4's at the time this was going on. which is what makes intels practice so bad. they were blocking the better product from consumers.

Yeah, AMD had a superior product, sold at a lower price. Intel's practices crippled AMD and damaged the consumer market.

If anything, a 1 billion Euro fine is too low.

 

[OminoMichelin]

What does the EU do with all the money they get from fining American companies?

Generally, they redistribute fines to poorer regions as grants for new business ideas. In my region we are benefiting a lot from this.

 

[ReAxion]

Tack a little bit on for keeping the Pentium name around.

 

[Ty4on]

The athlon was actually quite a bit faster than intel's P4's at the time this was going on. which is what makes intels practice so bad. they were blocking the better product from consumers.

AMD was dominating performance wise, but not in sales because of Intel's practices. We could have had much healthier competition from AMD.

 

[Nikodemos]

4.15 percent of turnover? Lame, they should've at least gone for the rounded number (5).

And yes, Intel deserve to be hit with way more than this. The shit they pulled 2002-2006 was fucking appaling.

 

[CyclopsRock]

That's a rather large fine considering Intel were basically doing consumers a favour, albeit for their own benefit.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

The performance perception is so apparent, in the age that the custom built pcs is all people are buying and pre made pcs are in a downfall, you can see for yourself. I dont think its malpractice for intel to provide rebates because they get performance and price as well now out of their products unlike before

I love my i7 processor as the next guy just like I loved my Athlon 64x2 processors back in the day of it's power dominance and it's infuriating that Intel pretty much destroyed healthy competition. For the first half of the last decade , AMD was just killing Intel when it came to performance and price, they kept hitting milestones left and right; first to 1Ghz, a consumer level 64-bit architecture (Windows OS pass XP have AMD64 folder for a reason), and multi-core while Intel stagnated with the Pentium line.

I remember when Intel released the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition back in the day, that was their best and most expensive processor at $1000. AMD released the faster Athlon 64 FX chips for hundreds less!

The fact of the matter is despite all this superior hardware and pricing, AMD never got to really get their investments back as Intel was doing the anti-competitive practices baring OEM from having AMD processors. It tanked AMD bottom line in the long run as Intel was making the killing in sales despite weaker hardware; it pretty much results in AMD current financial struggle. You can't really compete as much you do when you simply do not have the same level of R&D budget.

That's a rather large fine considering Intel were basically doing consumers a favour, albeit for their own benefit.

Considering they were fined over half a decade ago because of the situation I detailed and haven't paid up, how was this a favor?

 

[ISOM]

That's a rather large fine considering Intel were basically doing consumers a favour, albeit for their own benefit.

They weren't doing consumers a favor in the long run. Let's go through the long scenario of what intel was doing. Intel offers unfair rebates to buy their products. AMD can't match and eventually has to leave markets and or go bankrupt because they can't match what intel was doing. Intel with no AMD competition now not only takes away the rebates but raises the prices of their products. Short term sure it helps the consumer but not in the long run.

 

[Willectro]

I'm kind of indifferent about this. Consumers should be doing their own research at the time of purchase, although I do want there to be competition between Intel and AMD.

AMD wasn't doing so hot for a bit, but they have no excuse now given this console generation. If they can't make this work they deserve to fail.

 

[War Peaceman]

I'm kind of indifferent about this. Consumers should be doing their own research at the time of purchase, although I do want there to be competition between Intel and AMD.

Seriously did you even read the OP?

"The EU competition authority said Intel also paid German retail chain Media Saturn Holding to stock only computers with its chips."

In this particular example (not the only offence they were guilty of), they were denying consumers the choice.

 

[CyclopsRock]

They weren't doing consumers a favor in the long run. Let's go through the long scenario of what intel was doing. Intel offers unfair rebates to buy their products. AMD can't match and eventually has to leave markets and or go bankrupt because they can't match what intel was doing. Intel with no AMD competition now not only takes away the rebates but raises the prices of their products. Short term sure it helps the consumer but not in the long run.

That might be true, but that's doesn't seen like legitimate grounds to fine a company so much money to me. Prices are one of the major ways in which companies compete with each other. If you take the premise of my argument as sound - and given you said 'short term sure it helps' I assume you do - then the logical conclusion is that it's the 'unhelped' consumers, the ones getting a worse deal, who are keeping the competition afloat. If you want to ensure competition remains I'd be a much bigger fan of giving AMD a tax cut - allowing them to lower prices, incentivise customers to buy their products and thus making exclusivity deals with Intel and retailers a bad deal. As it stands, this fine basically hinders Intel's ability to compete on price. My solution makes AMD more accessible, this makes Intel less so. I know which I'd prefer!

 

[HoodWinked]

lol EU wants to wet their beak. give it to amd if you really mean it. 1.4 bil makes no sense what exactly do you think that money is going to go? consumers? r&d for consumer products? how about bonuses for politicians.

 

[Cipherr]

Why is noone reading this OP before replying... lol @ "doing the consumers a favor" and "consumers should do their research". Man they were paying retailers not to carry AMD chips at ALL.

 

[-COOLIO-]

That's a rather large fine considering Intel were basically doing consumers a favour, albeit for their own benefit.

amd is superior on the lower end due to their apus imho. so if you game on a sub $500 laptop i would go with amd.

 

[Des0lar]

lol EU wants to wet their beak. give it to amd if you really mean it. 1.4 bil makes no sense what exactly do you think that money is going to go? consumers? r&d for consumer products? how about bonuses for politicians.

How about reading the thread?

 

[ksan]

lol EU wants to wet their beak. give it to amd if you really mean it. 1.4 bil makes no sense what exactly do you think that money is going to go? consumers? r&d for consumer products? how about bonuses for politicians.

The main point here is to discourage anti-competitive behavior, it's a good idea even if they decide to burn the money afterwards.

 

[VariantX]

I'm kind of indifferent about this. Consumers should be doing their own research at the time of purchase, although I do want there to be competition between Intel and AMD.

AMD wasn't doing so hot for a bit, but they have no excuse now given this console generation. If they can't make this work they deserve to fail.

What good would research do if Intel were paying people to not stock AMD chips at all??

 

[OminoMichelin]

lol EU wants to wet their beak. give it to amd if you really mean it. 1.4 bil makes no sense what exactly do you think that money is going to go? consumers? r&d for consumer products? how about bonuses for politicians.

I answered above. That money is actually very helpful.

Generally, they redistribute fines to poorer regions as grants for new business ideas. In my region we are benefiting a lot from this.

 

[Funky Papa]

That might be true, but that's doesn't seen like legitimate grounds to fine a company so much money to me. Prices are one of the major ways in which companies compete with each other. If you take the premise of my argument as sound - and given you said 'short term sure it helps' I assume you do - then the logical conclusion is that it's the 'unhelped' consumers, the ones getting a worse deal, who are keeping the competition afloat. If you want to ensure competition remains I'd be a much bigger fan of giving AMD a tax cut - allowing them to lower prices, incentivise customers to buy their products and thus making exclusivity deals with Intel and retailers a bad deal. As it stands, this fine basically hinders Intel's ability to compete on price. My solution makes AMD more accessible, this makes Intel less so. I know which I'd prefer!

Intel destroyed its only rival and gained a de facto monopoly in the PC market using anticompetitive and illegal practices. They did such a number on AMD the company only survives these days thanks to graphic cards and the lower end market. Barely.

$1.5 billion is peanuts for what amounted to destroying the only competition Intel had. Intel spent over $6 billion greasing manufacturers and retailers. They should have been fined to the maximum extent of the law, and if the American government had any balls, quartered into smaller companies.

 

[DSN2K]

2008-2012 AMD were very competitive, Intel got done justifiably. I'm shocked and little embarrassed for those using their fanboyism to defend bad/illegal business practice. Mean holy crap we are consumers! we should not be defending this shit.

 

[War Peaceman]

The main point here is to discourage anti-competitive behavior, it's a good idea even if they decide to burn the money afterwards.

Exactly. One of the EU's biggest strengths is its willingness and ability to target these anti-competitive practices. I certainly have very little faith that the UK government would be so willing to target such behaviour.

 

[HoodWinked]

The main point here is to discourage anti-competitive behavior, it's a good idea even if they decide to burn the money afterwards.

yes thats the obvious part but the things people tend to not talk about is what exactly these fines end up.

 

[DeaviL]

The EU is my protection from being bent over and taken from behind by major corporations.

 

[DarkFlow]

Fine should have been higher imo. They made a Ton more by paying company's not to stock AMD. If I ran Intel, I would take this deal any day of the week.

 

[Aureon]

Did the USA government do anything at all in this merit?

Also, god bless EU courts, dammit.

 

[grumble]

Yeah this is nothing. Intel's market cap is 130+ billion us. This is nothing compared to the damage.

That being said, other companies do similar things all the time. Try suing everyone all the time.

 

[Salvadora]

These threads are always an embarrassment to read.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Good.

 

[Willectro]

Seriously did you even read the OP?

"The EU competition authority said Intel also paid German retail chain Media Saturn Holding to stock only computers with its chips."

In this particular example (not the only offence they were guilty of), they were denying consumers the choice.

So there were no other retailers worldwide stocking the AMD chips?