As Tarinder seemed to be trying to point out, not having a "compute engine" is hurting them in the business space. Being seen as the "budget option" is fine for short term, but it's the high end stuff that has the good profit margins. And no, I'd not expect for AMD to come out and say that they'd got AM4 ready until it was ready to go - no point giving Intel a heads up.
Presumably the octa- or deca- cores because AMD's single core performance is not that good? If so, then that's a good point - my five year old AMD hexa-core runs rings around a mobile-SB i5 for media ripping - but that's because I can load all six cores. Trouble is that a lot of benchmarks seem to be still preferring good single thread performance, so Intel wipes the floor here.
I'd agree here, 120-130W would be my "finger in the air" limit for TDP, and those 220W FX9 series processors are a no-go for me. Missus already comments that she knows when I've got my (AMD CPU+GPU) desktop on because the power usage meter jumps a couple of 100W.