In den letzten Wochen waren immer wieder Meldungen lanciert worden, in denen sich Intel gegen die vorgeblich ungerechtfertigte Behandlung durch die EU-Kartellbehörden beklagte. Nach Meinung von Intel hatte die EU in ihrem Urteilsspruch bestimmte Einwände von Intel nicht entsprechend gewürdigt. Diese besagten, dass AMD durch schlechtes Wirtschaften und vor allem nicht konkurrenzfähige Produkte ein Eigenverschulden zuzusprechen sei. Dem entgegengestellt hat die EU-Kommission am gestrigen Tag ein Dokument veröffentlicht, in dem beispielhaft einige der Geschäftspraktiken von Intel aufgeführt werden.
Diese führen klar an, dass Intel erheblichen Einfluss auf die großen OEMs genommen hat, mit dem Ziel die Einführungen von AMD-Produkten zu behindern. Vor dem Hintergrund, dass das Jahresgeschäft um PC-Produkte gewissen Zyklen unterworfen ist, die durch das Kaufverhalten der Konsumenten bestimmt werden, kann allein schon die Verschiebung einer Produkteinführung über den Erfolg oder Misserfolg entscheiden.
Einige Beispiele, die die EU-Kommission anführt:
"Intel rebates to Dell from December 2002 to December 2005 were conditioned on Dell purchasing exclusively Intel CPUs. For example, in an internal Dell presentation of February 2003, Dell noted that should Dell switch any part of its CPU supplies from Intel to its competitor AMD, Intel retaliation " could be severe and prolonged with impact to all LOBs [Lines of Business]."
"Intel rebates to HP from November 2002 to May 2005 were conditioned in particular on HP purchasing no less than 95% of its CPU needs for business desktops from Intel"
"Intel rebates to Lenovo during year 2007 were conditioned on Lenovo purchasing its CPU needs for its notebook segment exclusively from Intel. For example, in a December 2006 e-mail, a Lenovo executive stated: " Late last week Lenovo cut a lucrative deal with Intel. As a result of this, we will not be introducing AMD based products in 2007 for our Notebook products"."
"Intel payments to Media Saturn Holding (MSH), Europe's largest PC retailer, were conditioned on MSH selling exclusively Intel-based PCs from October 2002 to December 2007. For example, in a submission to the Commission, MSH stated: " It was clear to MSH in this regard that the sale of AMD-equipped computers would result at least in a reduction of the amount of Intel's contribution payments per Intel CPU under the contribution agreements (and thus in a reduction of the total payments received from Intel, even if the total volume of Intel-CPUs sold by MSH would have remained the same as in previous periods), although MSH never actually tested the issue with Intel."."
"Between November 2002 and May 2005, Intel payments to HP were conditioned on HP selling AMD-based business desktops only to small and medium enterprises, only via direct distribution channels (rather than distributors), and on HP postponing the launch of its first AMD-based business desktop in Europe by 6 months."
"Intel payments to Acer were conditioned on Acer postponing the launch of an AMD-based notebook from September 2003 to January 2004."
"Intel payments to Lenovo were linked to or conditioned on Lenovo postponing the launch of AMD-based notebooks from June 2006 to the end of 2006. For example, in a June 2006 e-mail, a Lenovo executive reported that: "[two Lenovo executives] had a dinner with [an Intel executive] tonight (…). […] When we asked Intel what level of support we will get on NB [notebook] in next quarter, [he] told us (…) the deal is base[d] [sic] on our assumption to not launch AMD NB [notebook] platform. (…) Intel deal will not allow us to launch AMD"."
Diesen Artikel bookmarken oder senden an ...
