At what point is a player considered to be an intermediate?

When do you progress from what would be called a beginner to an intermediate?  Is it just when you reach a certain rating?  If you are below an "intermediate rating", but have been playing chess for years, can you really still be considered a beginner?  Perhaps instead of progressing from beginner to intermediate, it's more like a progression of beginner to bad chess player?  Thoughts?

I searched and found this for you. There's no authority on terms like intermediate, but this looks like a reasonable way to categorise players: http://beginchess.com/2009/08/02/anatomy-of-a-chess-player-from-beginner-to-expert/

Lol, do you play those daily (*cough* engine *cough*) games just so it says 1700 on your profile preview?  You're barely 1200 blitz, I could probably beat you 5 out of 10 games. 

EDIT: Actually probably more like 7 out of 10 I'd win against you.  Did I say probably?  I should have said definitely. 

1600+  blitz chess.com is intermediate 

it depends on how the person feels about their chess skill. There is this where when the person thinks they're good at something, they usually turn out to be bad at that one thing. Since the average rating for rapid is 1200, I believe that 1200 is considered as "intermediate" and anything above it is probably adavanced.

Intermediate OTB is like 1200-1400. Intermediate for bullet on chess.com is 1800-2100. Intermediate for blitz on chess.com is 1600-1900. Intermediate for rapid on chess.com is 1500-1800. 

Sure, that seems logical. I'm just concerned about all the inactive accounts out there. Also, I'm kind of biased. I struggle with longer time controls while I can handle faster time controls to a greater extent. Great assertion though! Thanks for your opinion! 

I think it depends on your goals and the people you're around.

If your goal is to be a GM, and your local club is full of titled players, maybe you'll think of 2200 as intermediate. Ronen Har-Zvi had some story like this... and since in the past you couldn't even get a FIDE rating if you were below 2200, then I'm sure talented youth players (who had goals beyond the GM title) would think of 2200 as beginner.

But for you, if you started at sub 500 on chess.com and your goal is a 4 digit rating, then maybe 800 or 1000 is intermediate to you.

For me, my club experience was the best players were masters (2200-2300) and in the middle was something like 1500.

Also for me, it wasn't until about 1200-1300 OTB that I was consistently not giving away pieces for free, and consistently winning pieces or pawns when my opponent offered them. So for me there are defining points at 1300 and 1600 (because 1600 is when I consistently started to apply basic strategic ideas to my games instead of just looking for tactics and keeping my pieces active).

(that's not to say you only need to have tactics up to 1600... positional ideas are very useful like outposts, open files, etc... when I use the words positional and strategic I mean two different things)

Strong / weak / intermediate are all relative: they depend on perspective and lie in the eye of the beholder.

I know we could set the line anywhere, but I like this. Simple and straightforward.

Lol. Checking the account, brand new account, makes sense. 

Whenever you like, since these are just arbitrary terms unlike idiot, imbecile, moron which have specified IQ ranges before those were outdated.

just checked his blitz rating loll this kid is rated 800, i can beat you every game we play easily. if i took my blitz seriously I could probably get to around 1500

rapid and classical games are skill, and bullet shows your intuition , blitz really doesn't do anything and is boring, after I get my rapid rating to 2000, hopefully by the end of the year, I'm going to start focusing on improving my blitz and bullet

This player’s level is quite intermediate ig