This.  If Bitcoin never gets any bigger then it doesn't really matter what ASICMiner share is but if/when Bitcoin rises significantly in valuation the global mining revenue will bring in new players with deeper pockets.  Global mining revenue is ~$130M annually today.  That is the pie that ASIC developers are fighting over.  It doesn't matter if a company is building hardware for internal use, or selling that hardware to the public the potential revenue (either by directly mined BTC or from hardware sales) come from that same pool of $130M/yr of potential revenue.

Now like I said if Bitcoin doesn't get larger then all this is just a tempest in a teacup.  Does it really matter who is the king of the anthill?  Without continual growth and improvement, Bitcoin will be an experiment that limps along and eventually is replaced by something superior. Under that scenario it doesn't matter if ASICMiner goes bankrupt or runs 100% of the network.  

However lets say (over some period of time, months, years, decades) global mining revenue increases by an order of magnitude.  Suddenly ASIC developers are fighting over $1B potential revenue.  That is going to bring in companies with deeper pockets.  Today the potential revenue is (relatively) low and the risk is high but the longer Bitcoin continues without dying, the more regulatory issues get ironed out, and the higher the valuation the more it shifts the risk vs reward to one where larger players are interested. 

Forget AMD/Intel there are dozens of companies which make specialized ASICs for all types of industries who already have the expertise, staff, and industry contracts to roll out SHA256 ASIC and do so in a streamlined efficient manner (think shrinkwrapped build quality, ease of use, support, and distribution you would expect from say a home router).  However a slice of $100M at very high risk is simply not something they are interested in yet.  $1B+ potential revenue at a lower risk well that is a different story.

Edited for clarity.