3 ms·

Well in that case, my edit is inaccurate but the main comment stands. I won't fix the edit so that people won't get confused by your comment. But I will rant

by parsimo2010 6y ago

Well in that case, my edit is inaccurate but the main comment stands. I won't fix the edit so that people won't get confused by your comment. But I will rant that the article/blog doesn't have a publishing date at the top or bottom of the article, nor the URL. Plus, they don't seem to define a firm end date, they usually just referred to the present. So I'm not ashamed by not realizing the article was from 2018, because apparently the only way to pick that out is by noticing their stock chart cuts off in 2018 and they have no mention of current events.

dragontamer 6y ago
What you're missing out on is that the stock price of companies is largely based on perception, and not necessarily of reality. "Acting like a startup" gets you investor's money these days. See Nikola, Theranos, AMD, and more. They're not necessarily all bad products, but there's a lot of high-rollers who want to invest into risky companies. In effect: companies pretending that they're risky satisfies a market... a market to sell shares.
- egman_ekki 6y ago
  AMD next to Theranos and Nikola? Would you care to elaborate? I might need to sell some shares...
  - dragontamer 6y ago
    AMD is a fine company but its stock price has been overtaken by hype. AMD currently doesn't have the capacity to grow its marketshare. Its only got so many TSMC slots. We're in a period where every chipmaker is selling out every single chip they make, but AMD still isn't making as much revenue as NVidia or Intel because they're simply capacity constrained. AMD will stick around for sure IMO, but they're not nearly as strong as their stock price makes them seem. With that being said, the Xilinx purchase (lolwut?) will put them in a stronger position. Frankly though, AMD has no business buying a behemoth like Xilinx. But... if their investors give them enough money, then sure, I guess its a good move.
    - 908B64B197 6y ago
      AMD proved they have a solid design and that they were able to execute on it. Being capacity constrained is a nice problem to have.

dragontamer 6y ago

What you're missing out on is that the stock price of companies is largely based on perception, and not necessarily of reality. "Acting like a startup" gets you investor's money these days. See Nikola, Theranos, AMD, and more. They're not necessarily all bad products, but there's a lot of high-rollers who want to invest into risky companies. In effect: companies pretending that they're risky satisfies a market... a market to sell shares.

egman_ekki 6y ago
AMD next to Theranos and Nikola? Would you care to elaborate? I might need to sell some shares...
- dragontamer 6y ago
  AMD is a fine company but its stock price has been overtaken by hype. AMD currently doesn't have the capacity to grow its marketshare. Its only got so many TSMC slots. We're in a period where every chipmaker is selling out every single chip they make, but AMD still isn't making as much revenue as NVidia or Intel because they're simply capacity constrained. AMD will stick around for sure IMO, but they're not nearly as strong as their stock price makes them seem. With that being said, the Xilinx purchase (lolwut?) will put them in a stronger position. Frankly though, AMD has no business buying a behemoth like Xilinx. But... if their investors give them enough money, then sure, I guess its a good move.
  - 908B64B197 6y ago
    AMD proved they have a solid design and that they were able to execute on it. Being capacity constrained is a nice problem to have.