Otellini retiring May '13

[blastingcap]

Nov. 19, 2012

- AMD capitulates to Intel in x86-land and scraps Kaveri/Steamroller/etc.

- "My work here is done. Cya, guys." -Otellini

[pablo87]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

In business you only horde cash if you have nothing better to invest it into, including investing it into expanding your own busines to further your ambitions within your existing marketspace or to expand beyond it.

Putting your money to work for you is not bad governance, the opposite could be said though.

Pretty sad when you have a CEO who has so little vision, so little inspiration, so little ambition that he looks at a pile of cash in the bank and says to the BoD "I literally cannot think of a single thing to do with that money, none of my ideas stand a chance of generating a higher ROI on that cash than what the bank is already willing to pay us in interest".

I'm not against the concept of a rainy day fund, but as a CEO you should always have more ideas than you have money to put into pursuing those ideas, otherwise you aren't innovating at the same rate as your competitors who are investing all their cash back into innovation.

The following outlines the biggest 5 tech. companies cash balances. Which one is not like the other? Is it

a) Apple - $121B

b) Microsoft - $66B

c) Google - $46B

d) Qualcomm - $27B

or

e) Intel - $10B (with $7B debt)

Please select only one response.

[MisterMac]

Originally Posted by pablo87

The following outlines the biggest 5 tech. companies cash balances. Which one is not like the other? Is it

a) Apple - $121B

b) Microsoft - $66B

c) Google - $46B

d) Qualcomm - $27B

or

e) Intel - $10B (with $7B debt)

Please select only one response.

Id rather say the ones who will 100% need it the most for the future have it.

(Cause they're business models will take a dive).

[pablo87]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

maybe, but he isnt now. companies dont just announce the almost immediate retirement of the ceo unless they are really dissatisfied with the direction hes been going in

You're on to something. Grove and Barrett both became chairman after being CEO, Otelllini is resigning as CEO and a Director, he will not become Chairman. Something happened.

[ShintaiDK]

Only 1 of the 5 got fabs. And those fabs are valued at 64B$.

[pablo87]

Originally Posted by ShintaiDK

Only 1 of the 5 got fabs.

Which is the one that will need the most cash in the future...but has the least.

[ShintaiDK]

Originally Posted by pablo87

Which is the one that will need the most cash in the future...but has the least.

I dont think I follow your logic. Intels fab value increased 7B$ since the same time last year. Intel is doing exactly as it should.

You are doing it wrong if you are hoarding cash, when you should invest and expand. If anything, it makes the 4 other companies look weak. When they cant transform their cash into revenue generating business.

Oh, and stockholders tends to want the money payed out when stocks drop. I dont think Apple will have its huge cash reserve for long.

Apple Inc., which had more than $117 billion in cash and investments as of June 30, has said it will begin paying a dividend this fiscal year.

Microsoft keeps having pressure to raise its dividends payout.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...698030712.html

[Intel17]

Originally Posted by pablo87

The following outlines the biggest 5 tech. companies cash balances. Which one is not like the other? Is it

a) Apple - $121B

b) Microsoft - $66B

c) Google - $46B

d) Qualcomm - $27B

or

e) Intel - $10B (with $7B debt)

Please select only one response.

Hehe, do you stay mostly in cash in your brokerage account?

[podspi]

Originally Posted by pablo87

Which is the one that will need the most cash in the future...but has the least.

Where do you think those profits went?

Intel needs to make large capex to stay ahead, which is what they're doing... If anything, Intel looks like they have a very clear plan and are willing to invest in that plan. Not a bad thing.

[IlllI]

amd just needs to hand him the keys to the company

[pablo87]

Originally Posted by podspi

Where do you think those profits went?

Intel needs to make large capex to stay ahead, which is what they're doing... If anything, Intel looks like they have a very clear plan and are willing to invest in that plan. Not a bad thing.

I understand all of that but they had the cash and they used it to buy back a whole wack of shares in 2011 and even take on debt - bad move #1. they bought Mcafee, bad move #2.

Besides, if you overcapex, eventually you must suffer increased depreciation which will bring profits down unless you can raise prices on your products in a declining market which until AMD goes away, they can't.

And in fact, they're also investing in ASML which means that the fab investments are even greater than $12B this year.

In any event, he was a good CEO. What reason he's leaving we'll probably never know, the fact the transition is smooth speaks volumes.

[bononos]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

maybe, but he isnt now. companies dont just announce the almost immediate retirement of the ceo unless they are really dissatisfied with the direction hes been going in

Almost immediate? Its May '13. It looks like a planned orderly transition with Paul involved the new ceo job search.

[IntelEnthusiast]

I seem to remember when HP got rid of Carly Fiorina it was something that happened in a total of one month. The board meet and told her to change somethings when she didnt in a month she was made to resign. To me this immediate.

However there is nothing like that with Otellini. After 40 years with Intel® it seems as if it is time to retire and enjoy his golden years.

[MichaelBarg]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

maybe, but he isnt now. companies dont just announce the almost immediate retirement of the ceo unless they are really dissatisfied with the direction hes been going in

This does not seem like a firing for a couple reasons. Intel didn't name a succesor. If the board wanted to fire him, they'd normally want to do it fast meaning a lot less than 6 months and hopefully already able to announce the successor. Also the press release is very positive about Otellini.

It wasn't expected though, perhaps Otellini surprised the board for personal reasons of some kind. Unlike the last two Intel transitions there isn't an obvious successor, so maybe we're all over interpreting things? He may just be ready to retire and think this is a good time.

[OBLAMA2009]

Originally Posted by MichaelBarg

This does not seem like a firing for a couple reasons. Intel didn't name a succesor. If the board wanted to fire him, they'd normally want to do it fast meaning a lot less than 6 months and hopefully already able to announce the successor. Also the press release is very positive about Otellini.

It wasn't expected though, perhaps Otellini surprised the board for personal reasons of some kind. Unlike the last two Intel transitions there isn't an obvious successor, so maybe we're all over interpreting things? He may just be ready to retire and think this is a good time.

it looks like a firing because it wasnt planned, with a successor in mind. its pretty clear, he was fired:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._Analysts.html

[lopri]

Rofl. The dude is smart, that's for sure.

[lopri]

Originally Posted by ShintaiDK

Only 1 of the 5 got fabs. And those fabs are valued at 64B$.

That's where Intel should be heading, in an ideal world. Intel should bank on its expertise (i.e. manufacturing technology) instead of trying to tax consumers using governmental force (i.e. x86 patents). Imagine Intel providing high quality silicon to all other OEMs for whatever devices they invent. Intel will have upper hand over Samsung, TSMC, TI, IBM, GF, et al., and will command much larger customer base instead of being limited to Microsoft and Apple.

That would be a win-win for both Intel and consumers, as well as the industry as a whole. Only casualties would be current management and stock holders. "Only casualties" is, of course, a vast understatement. After all, those stock holders and board members are the ones calling the shots. And they will not want to give up a penny out of their pocket, let alone a chunk.

[bononos]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

it looks like a firing because it wasnt planned, with a successor in mind. its pretty clear, he was fired:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._Analysts.html

Yeah they have good enough reasons not enough to be happy but its still an orderly exit with Otellini helping Intel to find his replacement for 5 months.

[MichaelBarg]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

it looks like a firing because it wasnt planned, with a successor in mind. its pretty clear, he was fired:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._Analysts.html

I can see what you and some analysts are saying about dissatisfaction. The thing is no one involved says he was fired, or anything close to it. Every article I've seen says Otellini informed the board, and the board was surprised. Andy Bryant was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as asking him to stay longer and Otellini saying it was time for him to go.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resourc...ageone1120.pdf

That's a big difference even if it is time for new leadership.

[Idontcare]

Even Craig Barret, the CEO who brought netburst and the P4 to Intel, wasn't fired. I doubt very much that someone like Otellini who delivered as much for Intel as he did would be dismissed just because a few risky side projects didn't pay out.

What BoD wants to send their future CEO that message? "If you attempt to diversify Intel and do not succeed then we will fire you, you better stick with the status quo for the sake of your own pocketbook"

Think about it, that arguments here for why Otellini could have been fired are basically 100% counter to the reasoning that AMD's BoD fired Dirk. Dirk refused to put an emphasis on divesting into the mobile business, Otellini charged straight into it.

[guskline]

Instead of becoming "mired" in conspiracy theories, why don't we all take a moment to congratulate a man who spent 40 years at the same company on a well deserved retirement.
CEO Otellini deserves some kudos. Job well done!

[Phynaz]

Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009

it looks like a firing because it wasnt planned, with a successor in mind. its pretty clear, he was fired:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._Analysts.html

Fired six months in the future...ummmm, ok?

Read your own link, Bryant tried to get him to stay for a year.

[pablo87]

SP is down today. if the market was negative on Otellini, sp would rise. No, the reason the sp is down is because investors think there are bad news and challenges ahead for Intel.

[WiseUp216]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

In business you only horde cash if you have nothing better to invest it into, including investing it into expanding your own busines to further your ambitions within your existing marketspace or to expand beyond it.

Putting your money to work for you is not bad governance, the opposite could be said though.

Pretty sad when you have a CEO who has so little vision, so little inspiration, so little ambition that he looks at a pile of cash in the bank and says to the BoD "I literally cannot think of a single thing to do with that money, none of my ideas stand a chance of generating a higher ROI on that cash than what the bank is already willing to pay us in interest".

I'm not against the concept of a rainy day fund, but as a CEO you should always have more ideas than you have money to put into pursuing those ideas, otherwise you aren't innovating at the same rate as your competitors who are investing all their cash back into innovation.

Good article related to corporate cash hording trend we are seeing:

http://www.economist.com/news/financ...ts-crisis-dead

I don't think we're going to see a change in course anytime soon. This is especially harmful behaviour in the tech industry.