AMD: 'We're not for sale'

AMD: 'We're not for sale'

Summary: Sources told Reuters that AMD is exploring options that range from a "sale of its portfolio of patents," to "outright sale of the company," but the company has strenuously denied the claims.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Processors, Hardware
13

Chip maker AMD has strenuously denied claims that the company has hired a bank to seek a potential buyer, which could include the sale of the entire company.

The rumor kicked off when three sources familiar with the situation told Reuters that AMD had hired J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. to "explore options" ranging from a "sale of its portfolio of patents" to "outright sale of the company," although the latter option is described as "not the main option".

While J.P. Morgan refused to comment on the rumor, AMD spokesperson Drew Prairie denied the claim, stating that: "[AMD is] not actively pursuing a sale of the company or significant assets at this time."

Prairie went on to say that, "AMD's board and management believe that the strategy the company is currently pursuing to drive long-term growth by leveraging AMD's highly-differentiated technology assets is the right approach to enhance shareholder value".

Things have not been good for AMD lately, with the third quarter results coming in "weaker than expected" and the company shed around 15 percent of its workforce. That said, the company is actively diversifying.

AMD shares have fallen by 60 percent over the past year.

AMD is already making plans to move into the ARM server market, and another report suggests that AMD's A-10 APU chips could be at the heart of the next-generation PlayStation console. Earlier this month the company also released a new range of Opteron server processors, a mix of quad-core, 8-core, 12-core and 16-core parts ranging in clock speeds from 2.3 GHz to 3.5 GHz.

Topics: Processors, Hardware

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

13 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • It usually takes one denial to confirm it

    I don't see how AMD survives this tough economy.
    LBiege
    • You do not get it...

      Just how Sony, Microsoft, Walmart, etc. will survive it. AMD is doing decently financially. Sharp almost went under, themselves this year.
      Parafrost
    • AMD will survive

      AMD is going to be okay. Catch phrase, fiscal cliff scares people and first stocks they bail out of are the more risky penny stocks aka AMD but AMD has its own problems too. First, so called fiscal cliff will be resolved in December and all is well.

      As for AMD itself; new CEO gets it. He knows need of reorganizing and is firm, company not for sale in full good sign since he thinks it will be okay! Strong bank met with them good sign since they don't with going concerns. Cash on hand over a billion and the debt is LONG term not short term but they need more cash to make transformation and they also have one major holder which is a company abroad that wants and needs AMD to do well to the point, they have appointed a member from there to the BOARDS on AMD now which is more good news since few even know about this company that would not let AMD fail imo

      I bought at these prices in 09, doing it now and believe in 36 months or less, AMD will be a powerhouse company $20 per share. I might look young in my profile picture but have been investing and trading almost 31 years and remember when IBM when through similar situation in the 80s but larger company obviously and AMD is no IBM but AMD is taking all the correct actions now for future, will get money needed and will be able to repay all debts long term imo

      AMD has more risk than X for example but both AMD and Intel will be just fine so I buy more and more of both and RIMM too as well as fallen AKS because most is panic selling and I do business without emotions, taking advantage of emotions in the markets then have my emotions later when I bust open the fine wine for two glasses to celebrate on a thousand percentage profit only. 500% is great but no cause to celebrate for me so I do not drink until one thousand percent profits then two glasses of $500 good find wine to share rest with another. The more I make, the more people I can help in the USA! People in USA need help FIRST imo.

      Good luck on selling, buying or holding AMD or other stocks.
      Trendyglitzstocks Markmtk
  • AMD is publicly traded...

    ..thus, it is always "for sale".

    Problem is, who would really want to buy them?
    daftkey
    • Apple?

      That's about all I can imagine.
      T1Oracle
      • Although they'd probably be more interested in GlobalFoundries

        It's such a shame AMD sold that part off...
        T1Oracle
      • daftforsure .. Never happen

        There's no way under Anti-Trust laws Apple would be allowed to control the 2nd biggest CPU vendor in the world.

        Kool aid much?

        Your score today: -1000
        thx-1138_
        • Might want to re-evaluate your scoring mechanism there, Sparky.

          "daftforsure .. Never happen There's no way under Anti-Trust laws Apple would be allowed to control the 2nd biggest CPU vendor in the world. "

          Well, firstly, when did I ever say Apple would buy AMD. I only made the obvious comment that AMD was publicly traded, meaning theoretically, they could be bought by anyone with deep pockets. T1Oracle made the suggestion Apple would buy them, but then qualified that comment by reminding us that AMD doesn't even manufacture their processors anymore.

          Secondly, what makes you so sure that anti-trust regulators would have any problem with a company like Apple buying a company like AMD, especially given that neither company are dominant in their respective markets anymore, and the latter is seriously struggling. If anything, regulators might look favorably on an Apple purchase of an ailing AMD simply to keep competition alive with Intel. AMD is in a very precarious position right now, and is just as likely to fold within the next few years as they are to make a successful go at the ARM business.

          I personally think it would be in Apple's worst interests to purchase AMD, given that Apple has at least as much processor design expertise as AMD (likely more), and AMD no longer has any manufacturing capabilities. Such a purchase would simply cost Apple lots of dough, prop AMD up for a few more years, and leave Apple strategically in the same position it is in now - sourcing parts from third-party manufacturing plants. Only in this case they'd have less cash in the bank and a strained relationship with their current CPU partner (who also happens to be the #1 CPU vendor in the world). Doesn't sound like the kind of deal antitrust regulators generally balk at.
          daftkey
  • Realistically, who

    Realistically, Apple isn't going to screw up its relationship with Intel by buying AMD. How many companies could afford to buy AMD and of those, how many would want to? HP and IBM certainly aren't going to.

    Of course, however, to own a *controlling interest* in a publicly traded company often requires only about 1% ownership. Now hiring a major bank to put out feelers for a private stock sale is a whole lot more realistic.
    Rick_R
    • Apple has already indicated they are likely to ditch Intel

      Apple would do well to drop Intel and become an ARM licensee .. the GlobalFoundry idea is interesting under that light.
      BrentRBrian
      • What are you talking about?

        Apple ALREADY IS an ARM licensee.

        Hello??? iOS is OS X for ARM (more specifically, it shares the kernel and some API's, although it's heavily modified)
        Joe_Raby
      • It would kill them if they did. ARM isn't fast enough yet.

        ARM isn't close to being fast enough. There still isn't a 64bit version available in quantity.

        Many Apple users do video and music which requires serious horsepower and memory. Some mac have dual 8 core Xeons.

        BTW, Intel just set a record with a new super computer that had the highest Flops per watt of any other supercomputer with 2.44GFlops per Watt. The chip itself is rated for >4 GFlops per Watt. It has 50 cores and supports an additional 2 threads per core making it look like 150 core processor. Intel is hitting on more power efficiency.

        It will probably be at least 2 years before we have the ARM A50 line in quantity (2.5 GHz 64bit quad core with ECC memory) and I suspect that the highest end version will consume significantly more power than your cell phone ARM. At the same time Intel is reducing power requirements while keeping the performance. Let's see what the landscape looks like in two years.
        DevGuy_z
        • Correction 60 cores.

          Each core has 4 threading units but realistically only 2 That translates to around 180 threads per coprocessor and over a TeraFlop (1.01) of processing power while consuming 225 Watts but this translates to 4.48 GFlops per watt while maintaining full x86 64 bit compatibility. This, is suspect, exceeds all released ARM processors IP, beating current ARMs and those planned to be released in the next two years.
          DevGuy_z