Revenue down 22%.
Edit: Oh and it gets better... Intel posted a loss!
Actually they would still need Intel for some things. Still, their tech independance is a fact in some yearsChina might be pulling the rug out. They finally stole enough tech from Taiwan to do 7nm so they dont need Intel anymore
Apple's revenue was more than expected. It's iPhone line actually went up by just a bit. Mac was down due to supply chain and lockdowns in china.
Apple's profit was $19 Billion and revenue was $83 billion. These are impressive. Most thought the iPhone will go down. Tim Cook is a supply chain wizard.
Intel can survive if it focuses well and does not delay anymore.
They spend all the cash they made this quarter on building new FABs, 7.19 bil on "net additions to property and equipment"
Making it look like they are loosing money will probably have some positive effect on taxes in the future.
They are losing revenue compared to the last few years where they had significantly higher revenue due to everything that happened, that was known by everybody and most by intel themselves.You're overlooking the significant reductions in shipping volume. They're genuinely losing revenue while also increasing spending on volume. Kind of an awkward time to be doing that.
If they are losing revenue compared to pre 2018 where they had twice the net income every year since compared to 2017 then they might be in trouble.
"Intel is fine as long as it can pay me."To sum up the call and Intel's situation:
Shouldn't that be one of the very first requirements of Intel? And it's confirmed it isn't?They should add a requirement that the money is for foundries only, not IDM, to require Intel to decide whether they want to spin off the fabs and get money, or keep everything in house and do it on their own.
You may find what I am about to say unsatisfying but he gave up a large amount of VMware shares and that pay package in order to work at Intel. And of the remaining pay package, to get the full amount of the conditional pay, and the conditional pay is 79% of the pay package it requires him to triple Intel’s market cap* over 5 years to $403 billion (*triple at the time of his hiring, the market cap as of now is $148.47 billion.) But he may get some of that 79% if he meets lower targets."Intel is fine as long as it can pay me."
Did he at least offer to voluntarily reduce his colossal salary at least temporally due to these circumstances?
Do you have a source for the specifics of his compensation package? I can't find anything about that 3x in 5 years deal.You may find what I am about to say unsatisfying but he gave up a large amount of VMware shares and that pay package in order to work at Intel. And of the remaining pay package 79% of it requires him to triple Intel’s market cap* over 5 years to $403 billion (*triple at the time of his hiring, the market cap as of now is $148.47 billion.)
In sum Pat Gelsinger is going to get a whole lot of money regardless due to having making VMWare a lot of money and the Intel Board made him whole (even though the stock vote said no but the board can over rule.) And if Pat does the impossible (he will not) he will be insanely rich, 5x over.
Yet Pat has had only 3 jobs, Intel and he was shut out of leadership so he left to go to EMC (2009) and then VMWare 3 years later (2012) and now he is back at Intel. Yes it is still obscene but wallstreet is obscene in general and Intel was asleep at the wheel for all those years Pat was gone and his pay package is a Hail Mary play.
Do you have a source for the specifics of his compensation package? I can't find anything about that 3x in 5 years deal.
Pat is still the best paid CEO everywhere. He could even give up a significant chunk of that without losing that distinction. I guess we already know he won't.I am not saying I am happy with this current situation. I am angry at the whole wall street situation, our taxes, things involving FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate), etc. But Pat does not stand out as an individual, in this messed up "system."
Yep that is pretty much my feelings, on Pat as an individual and this specific company and sector. (this is me going myopic in thoughts and feels)Absurd that that's a unique selling point, but nonetheless.
I'm personally still pretty positive that he does the right moves for Intel's future. Unfortunately this doesn't help the immediate present as well as his outspoken personality, both which continued to help obfuscating the precarious situation Intel was and is in. I'd like to think there was a better precautionary way to go about that instead just waiting for the numbers to crash like it seems to happen now. I guess that's moot now.Fwiw, all of the "old Intel" people I've heard from seem positive/optimistic about Gelsinger as CEO. It's a low bar indeed, but he at least seems willing to make the big moves necessary to turn the company around, contrasted with his predecessors' complacency to ride out the company's decline. Absurd that that's a unique selling point, but nonetheless.
what determines what a company reports in their financial statements?
The reason AMD is totally opaque on this is that AMD itself doesn't want the console manufactures to know. After all if their own contract conditions are know and the overall numbers are know the competitor's contract conditions can be deduced. And Sony and Microsoft are pretty fierce competitors in that field, to the point that it's actually surprising how much both of them rely on the same hardware supplier in AMD.During the big shortages where there was very little RDNA2 availability compared to Ampere, I remember wanting to get an idea of how good a deal the console manufacturers were getting and trying to work out the margins there. AMD's report were totally opaque on this.
I'm personally still pretty positive that he does the right moves for Intel's future. Unfortunately this doesn't help the immediate present as well as his outspoken personality, both which continued to help obfuscating the precarious situation Intel was and is in. I'd like to think there was a better precautionary way to go about that instead just waiting for the numbers to crash like it seems to happen now. I guess that's moot now.
It's already biting him, considering how furious Intel is at the Raptor Lake leaks. People have been turned off by how little improvement it brings compared to ADL. Not good when you are a few months away from launch. The leaks are just going to convince people to jump on AM5.“AMD in the rear view” is going to bite him.
All the leaker said was that Intel's investigating, which is probably standard for all but planted "leaks". It's not like Raptor Lake had much room to wow anyway. It was always going to be an Alder Lake refresh, and perform accordingly.considering how furious Intel is at the Raptor Lake leaks
All the leaker said was that Intel's investigating, which is probably standard for all but planted "leaks". It's not like Raptor Lake had much room to wow anyway. It was always going to be an Alder Lake refresh, and perform accordingly.
Shouldn't that be one of the very first requirements of Intel? And it's confirmed it isn't?
Yeah tho as refreshes go it seems pretty great. Better perf/w, 50-100% more cores, better IPC for things that need copious L2. Thats more than we used to get for gen on gen.