3 ms·

This is absolutely crazy, I was at Intel back in 2016 and I knew that the company was in deep trouble but somehow continued to just truck along with (what I ass

This is absolutely crazy, I was at Intel back in 2016 and I knew that the company was in deep trouble but somehow continued to just truck along with (what I assume was) tricks to juice the share price. The markets Intel are in are very sticky, it's not a matter of "stick a different chip in it", there's whole software, support, supply chain, issues that make it very difficult to move. I really wonder if Intel is still a coherent company any more. Every time they hit up the US gov for more money I think that they've lost their minds. I could easily see them forced to split out the foundry business from the fabless IP for CPUs and then having to compete. Difficult to see how either of those businesses survive as-is though - neither is market leading, and a nascent GPU offering isn't going to help. Everything I've heard is Gelsinger is the person they need, but I think it's likely way too late, he'll be forced into financial engineering or quitting soon.

arcanus 4y ago
> Everything I've heard is Gelsinger is the person they need, but I think it's likely way too late, he'll be forced into financial engineering or quitting soon. Agree. I also thought Pat was a good choice, given his knowledge of the company and deep technical expertise. I've been surprised at Pat's poor leadership. I agree a leader should be optimistic, but he's acting irrationally exuberant. He is outwardly pretending Intel is 'back', that 'AMD is in the rear view mirror', and it's coming off as of he has completed underappreciated the magnitude of his challenge. Intel should have given investors a heads up a miss of this size was coming. It's starting to appear that Intel leadership is hiding the problems.
ac29 4y ago
> Every time they hit up the US gov for more money I think that they've lost their minds. If the additional funding helps them build quicker, is that a bad thing? Gelsinger secured ~tens of billions in funding for Intel, which may be the difference between catching up with TSMC and not. Even if that is his only accomplishment, its a major one.

arcanus 4y ago

> Everything I've heard is Gelsinger is the person they need, but I think it's likely way too late, he'll be forced into financial engineering or quitting soon. Agree. I also thought Pat was a good choice, given his knowledge of the company and deep technical expertise. I've been surprised at Pat's poor leadership. I agree a leader should be optimistic, but he's acting irrationally exuberant. He is outwardly pretending Intel is 'back', that 'AMD is in the rear view mirror', and it's coming off as of he has completed underappreciated the magnitude of his challenge. Intel should have given investors a heads up a miss of this size was coming. It's starting to appear that Intel leadership is hiding the problems.

ac29 4y ago

> Every time they hit up the US gov for more money I think that they've lost their minds. If the additional funding helps them build quicker, is that a bad thing? Gelsinger secured ~tens of billions in funding for Intel, which may be the difference between catching up with TSMC and not. Even if that is his only accomplishment, its a major one.