Posts by campmkting

Top EU court overturns Intel's billion-dollar antitrust fine

Intel wins in EU, not quite.

Media, world-wide media, few got it right . . . attempting to escape their complicity [?] ongoing for 30 years to distract from Intel dealing cartel engaged in antitrust concealing racketeering concealing industrial and economic espionage.

Media profited immensely on Intel Inside tied charge pay offs. Between OEMs selling PCs direct, their PC media direct co-conspirators and retail direct PC sellers absconded with nearly 100% of all Intel Inside 'tied charge'; kickbacks.

Intel v EU T286/09 RENV that is Intel's Intel Inside price fix appeal, is lost by Intel and affirmed by EU General Court in September 2023 validating the prior EUCC 37.991 and FTC Docket 9341 May 2009 and October 2010 "unnecessary cost charge raising price without an efficiency justification" decision respectively.

The Intel Inside price fix domestic matter continues in the United States seeking $20 billion for afflicted buyers. Proposal puts Intel on a remedial payment plan.

All up Intel Inside procurement price fix overcharge on that 30-year INTC 10K false certification "cooperative advertising" that is actually tied charge registered metering for sales out of channel reports by end sales outlets to Intel, including media direct sales and all end sellers spiffed for that report = $46,412,500,000 in direct harms.

Add approximately + 30% to + 50% for OEM dealer "in-direct" contributions to Intel Inside payments that the Illinois Brick vertical decision will not dismiss but EU did for OEM testimonies in EUCC 37.991.

EU General Court C-240/22 P continuing addresses bundle deal sales incentives and contract completion awards like First Dollar Discount. AMD and Intel are both engaged in these sales practices today.

Originally, in 2005, first dollar discount is relied to diverge from, and conceal Intel Inside cartel combining contracts, that diverted away from Intel Inside price fix that cost what is known as the Paul Consumer Action their victory chasing the wrong harm; 1st Dollar Discount.

Intel Inside diversion goes back to 1998 at Docket 9288 when that diversion was the vertical v horizontal restraint argument that continued into Docket 9341 but the vertical academic 'expert' camp was debunked on horizontal system and combing contract proofs. I will add that today's partial 'half-truth' media reporting Intel somehow "won" or is free from monopoly harms is not true and can enrage.

Intel disabled commerce at Constitution Article 1 section 8. Intel monopoly abuses attempted to erase democratic capitalism replaced with dealing cartel run by industrial state power complex.

Today's press reports flowering up one aspect of the Intel EU matters presents many falsities that I assure can enrage seeing Intel associate propagandists in action.

Can Intel Corporation police its own marketing communications and PR gangs. This problem is age old and evident over the last decade Intel communications attempting to reinvent the anti trust matters as other than they are and primarily to conceal media, all media, participation in the Intel Inside take.

The Media ambassador placements embedded inside Intel have to go.

What happen in the media today presenting a divergence from the actual situation is 'gaming' receivers to perceive something that is quite different from the truth. Their report angle and not all media got it wrong, but those who did, many in the PC and tech space, shows a plan by associate network of Intel personnel, their handlers and beholden engaged in a system manipulation presenting their divergence that is racketeering.

You can tell who was in on the Intel PR divergence and who was not by those that covered the ongoing EU Intel matters T286 and C-240 and those that edited that fact out of the EU release.

Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing

FTC Docket 9341 monitor, enlisted at 15 USC 5

Retained by U.S. Congress at Constitution 9th amendment "for the people"

Intel interrupts work on $25B Israel fab, citing need for 'responsible capital management'

John Pitzer, Intel Corporate VP of Planning & IR at Intel Corporation (INTC) BofA Global Technology Conference (Transcript), Jun. 04, 2024

""From an accounting standpoint, the way to think about this, given that we have 51% ownership, we will fully consolidate this through all the way 'to the net income line'. And then as you know, we've got that non-controlling interest line 'after net income' and that's how we reflect both the Brookfield agreement now the Apollo agreement, quite frankly, it also reflects when we sell down Mobileye, when we sell down IMS, everything that we deconsolidated that NCI line before we calculate EPS."

Observation; certainly net, and net after tax covering all costs, is the way intel thinks about paying for things present a production volume requirement.

"Now as you pointed out, consumption last year was about '270 million units for the market. We're pegged this year to like 276 million to 278 million."

Observation; in other word's 100% and AMD is not even a consideration.

"We still think longer-term this PC market is roughly a 300 million-plus or minus unit market. I will remind you that we were at 270 million units of consumption last year." "We're sort of pegging the market to 276 million to 278 million this year, but we were at the low end of seasonality in the first half. And so that will help as far as half-on-half growth."

Observation, confirmation, Intel takes all of it and conceals the inframarginal units that are more and about what AMD aims to produce?

Observation on channel data reconciled on 10-Qs; AMD adds 100 M that is not even considered by Intel producing 400 M units to address AMD?

"And so at the endpoint, the 2030 model, we kind of gave at the Intel consolidated level a 60-40 breakdown between gross margin and operating margin. That's really based on about $100 billion of revenue in that time period."

Observation; I mentioned $100 B in revenue when I did a straight-line depreciation schedule in q4 2021 published on Seeking Alpha.

Looking over my notes in q4 2021 the actual question was with Intel PP&E on a gross basis going from $63.245 billion to $168.342 billion and the number is actually $289 billion on all projects then detailed, how many units would Intel have to produce annually, at a $231 per unit average gross, with all other costs being the same COS 45%, MG&A 8%, R&D 19% that in q2 2024 is low to sustain $167 cost per unit gross basis for Plant, Property, Construction and Equipment.

The answer is 999,000,000 units valued at $230,833,263,157 in revenue.

I offered an intermediate example at $84.171 billion for PC&E sustaining $167 per unit gross. Intel would have to sell 502,740,000 units for $116,165,280,000 in revenue.

Saving grace for Intel is whatever the plant and equipment gross and spreading it out over seven years. Straight lining $289.233 billion over 20 years Intel would depreciate down to $169.638 billion in the 7th year (2028) reaching 2021 level albeit lacking any maintenance add in the 15th year.

On a net basis, on the financial, I have Intel at 309 million units of x86 production in 2023.

Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing