Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Justin Jaynes  

View Justin Jaynes' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • AMD's Su Stakes Future On Low Power Carrizo [View article]
    Title seems heavy handed and off. Future is staked on diversification and new chips, not bulldozers final stand
    Feb 27, 2015. 10:29 AM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bloomberg: Apple's first car could arrive by 2020 [View news story]
    Am I the only one here that finds it weird that we've heard for years about an Apple TV we've never seen? Now we're looking at cars? I'll not hold my breath for a car until I've seen a TV from Apple first.
    Feb 19, 2015. 11:23 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Is Poorly Positioned In Tablets And Smartphones [View article]

    "He cites this specific source in his argument. He believes AMD's (NASDAQ:AMD) tablet lineup of CPUs are superior to last-generation Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) parts, using flawed logic. However, his arguments are no longer relevant, because AMD no longer competes with Haswell parts. The Broadwell-Y series is the direct competitor to AMD's Mullins family of SoCs."

    Mullins doesn't compete with Broadwell, or Haswell for that matter. It competes with Bay Trail, and soon cherry trail and the other lower cost Intel chips. Broadwell-Y is $100's more expensive than mullins.
    Feb 19, 2015. 01:55 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ARM Holdings Thrives Despite The Intel Onslaught [View article]
    One thing people tend to forget is ARMH's relatively low overhead compared to their competition as well.
    Feb 12, 2015. 12:28 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Happy Valentine’s Day from Intel [View article]
    Were they blue?
    Feb 11, 2015. 04:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Happy Valentine’s Day from Intel [View article]
    My wife would punch me in the unmentionables if I gave her a $99 tablet.
    Feb 11, 2015. 12:42 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD: Why A Buyout Doesn't Really Make Sense [View article]

    What's your source for saying amd pays Intel for licensing fees, and if that's the case then how much does Intel pay amd for x64? Your article contains some factual errors that should be corrected I believe.
    Feb 9, 2015. 08:24 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ARM Holdings May Be Worth A Look [View article]
    Michael - one thing to bear in mind, the core was just announced, so we're likely a year or more away from seeing anything in production.

    I think Joel Hruska of extremetech had a pretty good write-up on the differences between A57 and A72:

    Essentially, it seems to be designed for a phone first mentality, instead of phone and server part like the A57 and associated interconnect IP, based on the explanation in Joel's article.

    All in all, I agree I'll look to establish a small position in ARM if we pull back to the low $40s. One thing I don't like about ARM and Qualcomm are the anemic yields, so if I'm going to go with these companies I would want a good entry so I can see the potential for some decent capital gains.
    Feb 5, 2015. 01:29 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Rumors: Separating Fact From Fiction [View article]

    It's essentially a really big credit card, and is based on the size of accounts receivable. It essentially adds liquidity while they're waiting to get paid, from my understanding.

    Here are the details.
    Feb 5, 2015. 11:38 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Rumors: Separating Fact From Fiction [View article]
    "The Rating Outlook is Stable. Fitch's actions affect approximately $2.6 billion of total debt, including the undrawn portion of the company's revolving credit facility (RCF)."

    This is like saying their credit cards are maxed out, even though they are not.
    Feb 5, 2015. 10:19 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Report: AT&T, Verizon will sue FCC immediately after reclassification [View news story]
    Free - or neutral? Don't think free internet is on the table.
    Feb 4, 2015. 01:53 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nvidia: The Repercussions Of RAMGate [View article]
    I think (AMD) took enough flak last time from the reference coolers. That's why they (rumored) have hired Asetek to create some custom coolers for them.
    Feb 2, 2015. 11:48 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Rumors: Separating Fact From Fiction [View article]
    I've never said that AMD didn't Seattle the ball with Bulldozer, to use an analogy that made my night sad.

    But since it never went to trial, all I am saying is you can't speak with certainty anymore than I can. It's nothing but speculation. And I'm not going to agree with you based on the findings from the EC anymore than you're going to agree with me.
    Feb 1, 2015. 10:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Rumors: Separating Fact From Fiction [View article]
    Ephud - as I stated, if my understanding is correct, AMD chose to settle specifically because the supreme court ruled all the evidence gathered by the EC as inadmissible. So, yes, if I'm AMD and the most incriminating evidence was thrown out, I would absolutely settle.

    The purpose of a trial is to allow for cross examination. Again, had this went to trial, most of the issues you bring up would've been dealt with - aka, letting Intel's lawyers argue the evidence against Intel - but it never got to that point.

    And the fines against Intel in Europe are in the billion dollar range, no? Intel is still appealing them, but they've been fined and are still fighting it.

    "(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."
    Feb 1, 2015. 05:32 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • AMD Rumors: Separating Fact From Fiction [View article]
    True - but Intel moved to have these findings thrown out of the US case, so we'll never know the true outcome. So in the sense of "innocent until proven guilty", then yes, Intel is innocent.

    If Intel didn't have anything to hide in the case, then why move to have the testimony thrown out of the US courts, where they would've been allowed a defense? Intel avoided having to answer these questions that you were saying they were never allowed to in a court of law; Intel *didn't want* to answer these questions apparently.

    But at this point we're both just speculating, so I will cede that you are correct in that Intel is innocent in a court of law.

    But they've also been accused of monopoly practices in multiple countries, had billions of fines levied against them, had our US FTC rule against them, and had to pay billions to competitors to settle complaints in which they agreed to pay billions, but had a clause in there that they never admitted any wrong doing.
    Feb 1, 2015. 02:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment