The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
AMD to sell some testing operations, gives weak revenue forecast

Advanced Micro Devices Inc said on Thursday it would sell most of its assembly and testing operations in two Asian cities, as the struggling chipmaker looks to cut spending amid weak demand for its processors for personal computer.

AMD said it will sell 85 percent of its ATMP (assembly, test, mark and pack) operations in Suzhou, China and Penang, Malaysia to China's Nantong Fujitsu Microelectronics Co Ltd (NFME) for a net proceeds of $320 million.

The company also said it would create a joint venture with NFME as part of the deal, to which it will contribute 1,700 employees. It said it did not plan to cut any jobs.
...
AMD forecast current-quarter revenue to fall 10 percent, give or take 3 percent, sequentially. The midpoint of the range translates to about $955 million, well short of analysts' estimate of $996.3 million.

The company's shares were volatile in trading after market and were last down 0.5 percent at $1.96.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015...20151015?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews
 
Kind of stunning that AMD still had these kind of operations in house.

At its peak AMD's packaging seemed to be at a complexity level decently above average, even if not as high-end as Intel and IBM. AMD must have derived some utility from having those operations in-house, even in the face of losing the fabs.
Perhaps it mattered back when those complex products like the socketed server chips and desktop models were still being sold in any significant volume.
AMD seems like it's still going for interposer integration, which would take some of the load off of the more boring substrate below, and at least for Fiji that packaging is handled by Amkor, I think.
For products that do need complex packaging, it might be 2.5D where AMD's operations are not heavily used. For everything else, AMD's remaining ambitions seem too low to push for bespoke engineering or guarantee sufficient volume.

Couldn't have GF have wanted that capability when it was spun off, or is this something AMD had trouble finding a buyer for? If those facilities were useful but retained by AMD, it would have hurt GF's ability to branch out initially.
 
It just struck me, this thread's been around since friggin' mid-2007. That's insane.

How long would you guys say AMD has left in it, reasonably, if things keep on the way they are right now? They're losing tons of money every quarter (seems to be getting worse and worse actually), as a result they're eating their own tail with cutbacks to R&D, which will only lead to weaker products and even worse competitiveness, more losses, another round of layoffs, and so on and so forth.
 
It just struck me, this thread's been around since friggin' mid-2007. That's insane.

How long would you guys say AMD has left in it, reasonably, if things keep on the way they are right now? They're losing tons of money every quarter (seems to be getting worse and worse actually), as a result they're eating their own tail with cutbacks to R&D, which will only lead to weaker products and even worse competitiveness, more losses, another round of layoffs, and so on and so forth.

I've heard insiders from partner companies like ASUS claiming AMD had 6 to 12 months left and that was a year ago.
Personally if nothing changes then I'm afraid 2018 will be last year of AMD as it is, but if Zen pans out semi-successful then it will carry them over for few more years.
 
They can easily go one for another 3 to 4 years the way things are right now.
Just look at their current cash position, they current cash burn, the way they have reduced OPEX, and the new cash that's coming in after spinning off their test & packaging operations.
 
if Zen isn't good, in no way competitive to Intel, 4 years after Zen's release, that would be optimistic. The current sell off gave them maybe 1.5 quarters extra cash. That 70 million a quarter interest will not change, and in 2017 is that when they have to pay back portions of the principle, I don't remember though, I might be incorrect.
 
They can easily go one for another 3 to 4 years the way things are right now.
That's assuming status quo from now until the very bitter end. Is that a reasonable expectation though?

I would think that as the precipice approaches, we can expect key talent to either bail or get poached. This will delay new products and speed up the company's destruction, causing more rounds of defections and delays.
 
It just struck me, this thread's been around since friggin' mid-2007. That's insane.

How long would you guys say AMD has left in it, reasonably, if things keep on the way they are right now? They're losing tons of money every quarter (seems to be getting worse and worse actually), as a result they're eating their own tail with cutbacks to R&D, which will only lead to weaker products and even worse competitiveness, more losses, another round of layoffs, and so on and so forth.

AFAIK they are increasing R&D and cutting other pieces.
 
if Zen isn't good, in no way competitive to Intel, 4 years after Zen's release, that would be optimistic. The current sell off gave them maybe 1.5 quarters extra cash. That 70 million a quarter interest will not change, and in 2017 is that when they have to pay back portions of the principle, I don't remember though, I might be incorrect.
There is no need to speculate about the current cash drain: it's all in the disclosures.

Their cash position goes down by about $300M per year, but tha number should be less going forward due to OPEX reduction.

And they only need to pay off the first bond in 2019. Tadaaa: more than 3 years.
 
AFAIK they are increasing R&D and cutting other pieces.
If they have plans to increase R&D, I haven't seen it. (I could have missed it.) But each quarter, they're shouting from the rooftops how their OPEX is reduction all the time: they're very proud about their inability to invest...
 
That's assuming status quo from now until the very bitter end. Is that a reasonable expectation though?
Who knows... One might hope that Zen will get them some new business.

I would think that as the precipice approaches, we can expect key talent to either bail or get poached. This will delay new products and speed up the company's destruction, causing more rounds of defections and delays.
That is a serious concern indeed. Hard to know about salaries, but just look at stock compensation: $50M/quarter for Nvidia vs $13M for AMD.
If they have roughly the same amount of employees, that's a significant difference. It doesn't help that a bunch of semiconductor companies are relatively close to recent highs while AMD is anything but.
 
It just struck me, this thread's been around since friggin' mid-2007. That's insane.

How long would you guys say AMD has left in it, reasonably, if things keep on the way they are right now? They're losing tons of money every quarter (seems to be getting worse and worse actually), as a result they're eating their own tail with cutbacks to R&D, which will only lead to weaker products and even worse competitiveness, more losses, another round of layoffs, and so on and so forth.

The last year AMD and ATI existed independently was 2005 (merged in 2006)

2005 revenue:
ATI $2.21 Billion
AMD $5.86 Billion
ATI +AMD $8.07 Billion
Intel $38.83 Billion
Nvidia $2.01 Billion

A decade later, last 4 reported quarters:
AMD $4.28 Billion (-47%)
Intel $55.16 Billion (+42%)
Nvidia $4.68 Billion (+132%)
 
If they have plans to increase R&D, I haven't seen it. (I could have missed it.) But each quarter, they're shouting from the rooftops how their OPEX is reduction all the time: they're very proud about their inability to invest...

I read somewhere that AMD didn't reduce their R&D in over a year and that they even increased their % of revenue on R&D (because of reduced revenue?).
 
I read somewhere that AMD didn't reduce their R&D in over a year and that they even increased their % of revenue on R&D (because of reduced revenue?).
Just the opposite ...

The AMD CTO didn't quibble about the reduction in R&D, and admitted that as the PC market has contracted AMD has put less R&D effort into this part of the business. Instead of supporting its role in the PC market AMD was looking to target R&D in carefully chosen operations, so-called "banking the future of the Company."
Papermaster sketched out the narrower targets of its reduced R&D spend; "So it is on that next generation of CPUs starting with Zen. It is on successive generations of our graphics core next." With particular reference to its APU and GCN designs Papermaster boasted that a lot of investments have paid off in getting its APUs adopted for its game console wins. Furthermore the AMD CTO asserted that "we have a very strong roadmap for that Graphics Core Next IP going forward".
http://hexus.net/tech/news/industry/85448-amd-quizzed-sharp-drop-off-rd-expenditure/
 
I read somewhere that AMD didn't reduce their R&D in over a year and that they even increased their % of revenue on R&D (because of reduced revenue?).
Ok, I went to the source. ( http://phx.corporate-ir.net/Externa...yfFBhcmVudElEPTUyMDY1Mzl8Q2hpbGRJRD01OTgxNTc= )

While I can't verify the veracity of your claim (because I only checked the last quarter), I can say that I was wrong: their OPEX has been reducing steadily for the last year, but in the last quarter their R&D went up by 4%.
 
He was asked about R&D from 5 years ago. I took a quick look at it. Saw their CFO commentary for Q4 2010, Q4 2014 and this Q3 2015. They were guiding 19-22% for R&D on 2011, then they had 19% on 2014 and if I didn't mix up on my mind math they got 22% this quarter.

heres the page for the commentaries http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=quarterlyearnings
 
Whether R&D as a function of percentage of revenue grows or shrinks is completely uninteresting; a non-measure really, not least in part because AMD's revenue is shrinking steadily. It's the absolute dollar-and-cents amounts that are the real meat and potatoes...
 
I think it may come down to ones perspective and whether discussing overall R&D or technology sectors within AMD, this is more complex for AMD than say NVIDIA as they have such a broad umbrella of required research.
Overall I thought AMD R&D was actually down for the last few years (AMD is below trend even allowing for the rise and fall more recently for their R&D).
Shocking comparing R&D for AMD to NVIDIA (much higher) based upon % sales; NVIDIA spends 31% of sales on R&D compared to roughly 20% by AMD - this still stands for 2015.
Shocking because AMD needs to fund both GPU and CPU from that - putting aside other technologies as both of them are involved in other diverse projects.
http://www.icinsights.com/news/bulletins/Top-Semiconductor-RD-Leaders-Ranked-For-2014/
Amazing how much AMD has done to date with their lower research budgets and kudos, but it will eventually hurt them IMO.
Cheers
 
Something has to change ... since 2009-Q4 to 2015-Q2 real dollar spending for R&D has tanked approx. 50%. If budgets are tied to sales, increasing the sales to R&D ratio is the only thing that can be done in the face of decreased sales revenue.
In the last five years AMD’s R&D spending dropped by almost 50 per cent: from $432 million in Q4 2009 to $225 million in Q2 2015 as a result of revenue drops as well as AMD’s attempts to demonstrate profitability.
...
In a bid to support its ongoing R&D operations, AMD already increased research and development spending as a percentage of revenue to 23.8 per cent in Q2 compared to 22.5 per cent in Q1. Since the company expects its sales to increase in the third quarter, it will naturally be able to either further increase its R&D expenses, or at least maintain them at the current levels.
https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1862191/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top