MD vs Intel: Anti competitive behaviour or competitve advantage?

Coursework topic

AMD vs Intel: Anti competitive behaviour or competitive advantage?

You are required to carry out an analysis of the Intel and AMD case. Your essay should consist of two parts. In the first part, you should provide a brief descriptive account of the AMD Intel competition case (2005), highlighting the main issues surrounding the dispute. This section should not exceed 500 words. In the second section (of 1500 words approx), you should provide an evaluation and analysis of the case. Here you are required to do the following

a. Explain the theoretical basis of the case against Intel. Why Intelas behaviour was considered anti competitive? You should develop linkages between this specific case and broader theoretical perspectives covered in the module

b. Explain Intelas position in the case. Again, the focus should be to link the arguments put forward in defence of Intel to the general theoretical perspectives, especially those from the business strategy literature.

c. Your own evaluation of the case. On balance, do you think Intelas behaviour was anti-competitive or is it the case that its success rests on genuine competitive advantage?

For the individual article:
To gain a pass mark you will be expected to attempt the questions asked above and show some relevant knowledge and theory. To gain higher marks we would expect good use of relevant theories, examples and data.

On the feedback sheet we will comment on the work and identify the strong and weak points. We will also tick the assessment grid on the back of the feedback sheet as more general feedback.

Marks for the individual written assignment will be awarded on the basis of the following criteria with equal weight:

a? coverage of all aspects of the assignment questions
a? degree to which answer exhibits understanding and knowledge of relevant economic and business strategy theory and empirical evidence
a? degree to which answer demonstrates consistent and coherent analysis and purposeful structure
a? evidence of the use of a variety of sources
a? clarity of explanation
a? critical analysis
a? conclusions that are supported by the discussion
a? appropriate citing and referencing of material used