5 ms·
Some context is available here: https://apnews.com/article/intel-trump-cotton-yeary-tan-206152398b39bf92ebe6391add109388 https://apnews.com/article/intel-trump-
by Alupis 1y ago
Some context is available here: https://apnews.com/article/intel-trump-cotton-yeary-tan-206152398b39bf92ebe6391add109388 https://apnews.com/article/intel-trump-cotton-yeary-tan-2061...
FTA:
“In March 2025, Intel appointed Lip-Bu Tan as its new CEO,” Cotton wrote in the letter. “Mr. Tan reportedly controls dozens of Chinese companies and has a stake in hundreds of Chinese advanced-manufacturing and chip firms. At least eight of these companies reportedly have ties to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.”
- everfrustrated 1y agoIf true, questions should also be raised about the Board who must have signed off on any conflicts of interest.
- tiahura 1y agoThis is entirely on the board. They didn’t know / They didn’t clear first with govt. Either way it’s grossly negligent.
- threatripper 1y agoNobody really knows if 18a is a failure or if it was turned into one by deliberate mismanagement. It feels like when Microsoft took over Nokia.
- tlogan 1y ago> If true … I don’t know about his investments, but one fact is clear: he was CEO of Cadence Design Systems, which has just pleaded guilty to federal charges for exporting technology to China. That alone should make him ineligible to lead a company with major government contracts. If he resigns (and he will), the board should go with him.
- dangus 1y agoIf I was an Intel shareholder I would be livid. Can you imagine the look you'd get if it was 1998 and you told me that AMD would have over twice the market capitalization of Intel in the next few decades? In 1998 Intel was 50x larger by market cap than AMD. It is a company that has been catastrophically mismanaged.
- hedgehog 1y agoLivid about the problem or livid that they're talking about axing the first CEO in decades that might have a shot at fixing the problems?
- jordanb 1y agoFixing how? His first major act is to fire 20% of employees, refocus on old technology (smt) and deprioritize next gen (14a) process development. This is tantamount to surrendering as a leading foundry.
- hedgehog 1y agoFixing the willful ignorance that the market structure today is very different from 20 years ago. Process leadership and volume leadership are tightly coupled, and no integrated chip company will again have volume leadership. Intel's historical margin power built on a combination of monopoly on performance (in some markets) and superior economies of scale, that's not coming back. The question is not whether they can get fabs up and going with process nodes competitive with TSMC, the question is whether doing it actually leads to any kind of success given the costs involved. The key question is what the basis is for competition going forward, and what Intel's strengths are in that context. To paraphrase, Intel has to go of the notion that for Intel to win AMD and TSMC have to lose. The strategy that follows from that might involve some painful choices.
- brahhd 1y agoHe came in and trashed everyone's effort then fired them It played out so smoothly over 3 months it seemed scripted from the start That's not going to inspire people to step up. Everything is legal for sure, lawyers were paid to agree. But it feels 100% like an orchestrated short of Intel. A GameStop situation. I am fucking tired of 60+ year olds setting everyone else up for failure. They've been in charge as the problems came about. They're the problem then. Boomers and GenX need to get out of the way or get stomped by youth.
- everfrustrated 1y agoIf Tan resigns I suspect only way Pat would come back is with an entirely new board, so either way it's likely the board is done.
- 7speter 1y agoHow effective would Gelsinger be at returning after the then previous CEO took the company in a totally different path and practically trashed Gelsinger’s original plan?
- addaon 1y ago> How effective would Gelsinger be Effective at what? Intel’s done, it’s on the Boeing trajectory, it’s just about grabbing what you can as the ship goes down.
- prinny_ 1y agoI highly doubt the US government will let Intel sink. I think one way or another they will bail them, either by emergency funds or through government contracts, and keep the lights on until they turn things around. For the same reasons they didn’t let Boeing die out.
- addaon 1y ago> For the same reasons they didn’t let Boeing die out. Right — so that extends the time window for pillaging, and means that you can raid future taxpayer money, not just current assets. But there’s still no “turn around,” it’s just different flavors of getting paid massively to go down with the ship.
- snapetom 1y agoThe Board is a disgrace. For all his fault, Gelsinger had Intel at least on a path back, yes, it's going to take a lot of money because the past two decades have been missed opportunities. And not only did the Board not do their proper due diligence on Tan, but just let him toss Gelsinger's plan out? Shareholders should sue every one of them.
- rootjknak 1y agoIntel board members: Frank Yeary, managing member Darwin capital advisors James Goetz, partner Sequoia Capital Andrea Goldsmith, dean of engineering Princeton University Alyssa Henry, former square CEO Eric Meurice, former CEO ASML Barbara Novick, cofounder BlackRock Steve Sanghi, CEO microchip Gregory Smith, former CFO Boeing company Stacy Smith, chair of Autodesk Dion Weisler, former CEO HP There are a lot of people that should not be on the board of a semiconductor company.
- versteegen 1y ago"Should not be" is too harsh, you should have diversity on a board, not only people from that single industry, but maybe you mean "too many". Presumably the investor-appointees have broad experience with many other companies. The type of people who should know how to hire a CEO.
- spwa4 1y ago> Presumably the investor-appointees have broad experience with many other companies Investors have experience "managing" money to themselves. What is controversial about this? It's like saying pilots have experience flying planes. These investors have a lot experience financializing everything about a company. We know where that leads, and it's not to success ... well, except for the investors with inside information that get out at the right time.
- to11mtm 1y agoI'll bite. Autodesk turned into a rent seeking company over a decade ago. Anyone Ex Boeing is sus, but maybe I'm wrong. Ex HP CEO is also sus because HP has been slowly circling the drain for the last 20 years.
- adastra22 1y agoDepends a lot on whether the ex-Boeing was pre McDonnell Douglas.
- mgdev 1y ago
- like_any_other 1y agoLets not be hasty in condemning him - some "cross pollination" is probably standard in this business. I'm sure there are plenty of Chinese high-tech companies, with CEOs named something like Jack Smith, or Andrew Callahan, that were caught exporting technology to the USA.
- skywhopper 1y agoI mean, given that Tom Cotton wrote it, I would be surprised if it were true in any meaningful sense.
- cyanydeez 1y ago[flagged]
- woooooo 1y ago"Controls dozens of companies" is a pretty strong allegation without naming a single one. "Has a stake in hundreds" is true of anyone who owns a global index fund.
- moomoo11 1y agoTrue capitalism is embracing the free market, or trying to be close to one. In Soviet Russia you follow their rules and do everything/anything to win. In US you follow the rules there and do everything/anything to win. In China/India/country you follow the rules there and do everything/anything to win. Through law, politics, advertising. The ultimate goal is to win globally right? A true capitalist leader can operate with complete lack of attachment for the sake of the corporation.
- scrubs 1y agoHuh? What'd we supposed to learn? If we're doing billion foot maxims i prefer iacocca: you need people, product, profit. Without people you can't get the other two.
- croemer 1y agoWhat does FTA mean here? "From The Article"?