Question Intel's future after Pat Gelsinger

[DAPUNISHER]

These layoffs are not being done intelligently judging by employee responses. No love for Pat either.

https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1lvlr8l/intel_layoffs_begin_chipmaker_is_cutting_many

Crikey!

"The cuts were way deeper than what that list shows. I work at RA as a VSG technician, and my shift alone lost 9 technicians to the cuts. Our sister day shift lost 11, and our Shift 1 dwellers lost 5 engineers. There's still 2 more shifts coming in starting tonight that will get hit. None of those positions are on the list."

 

[Saylick]

These layoffs are not being done intelligently judging by employee responses. No love for Pat either.

https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1lvlr8l/intel_layoffs_begin_chipmaker_is_cutting_many

Crikey!

"The cuts were way deeper than what that list shows. I work at RA as a VSG technician, and my shift alone lost 9 technicians to the cuts. Our sister day shift lost 11, and our Shift 1 dwellers lost 5 engineers. There's still 2 more shifts coming in starting tonight that will get hit. None of those positions are on the list."

Seems like Intel's 5 Layoffs in 4 Years plan will come to completion soon enough.

 

[igor_kavinski]

If Pat had simply focused on pushing the teams responsible for delivering a better CPU architecture design, these current layoffs probably would not have been so severe. A good design could have been fabbed with TSMC processes and sold for a good enough profit which could've fueled Intel's fab expansion plans. His whole shtick of trying to do things too quickly ultimately got him sacked and put Intel in the current precarious position. He burned Intel out and now nothing but a complete reset and 5 day water fast akin to what LBT is trying to do, may have a chance of saving Intel.

 

[cytg111]

And/or whatever comes after Trump realizes a Chips Act 2.0 is necessary.

In terms of US national security, I dont see how Intel can be allowed to fail.

 

[igor_kavinski]

In terms of US national security, I dont see how Intel can be allowed to fail.

Trump will sell Intel to Russia.

Problem solved.

 

[Thunder 57]

And/or whatever comes after Trump realizes a Chips Act 2.0 is necessary.

In terms of US national security, I dont see how Intel can be allowed to fail.

I don't want to see Intel fail but I am also against bailing out companies that made piss poor decisions. I don't know what the answer is.

 

[johnsonwax]

I don't want to see Intel fail but I am also against bailing out companies that made piss poor decisions. I don't know what the answer is.

The only alternative then is for the feds to operate their own fab.

I will note that DOD just bought a stake in a rare earth mine in California. Even the Trump admin is realizing the limitations of the neoliberal approach.

 

[Io Magnesso]

I don't want to see Intel fail but I am also against bailing out companies that made piss poor decisions. I don't know what the answer is.

It might be a good idea to crush Intel and transfer Intel's fixed assets to TSMC. lol
Its manufacturing equipment

 

[DrMrLordX]

And/or whatever comes after Trump realizes a Chips Act 2.0 is necessary.

In terms of US national security, I dont see how Intel can be allowed to fail.

Exactly how much does Uncle Sam rely on Intel? Surely the DoD could gobble them up if necessary.

 

[igor_kavinski]

It might be a good idea to crush Intel and transfer Intel's fixed assets to TSMC. lol
Its manufacturing equipment

Yeah. TSMC US of A!

Maybe even USSMC (subsidiary of TSMC).

 

[adamge]

From hazy memory of things I don't really understand,

There is precedence for a regional office to "go rogue" and align with its local country rather than its global headquarters. I believe it was ARM China.

My point is, USA DoD and vendors can move all the Intel people and assets to TSMC USA office. Then, if TSMC ever loses control to China, the TSMC USA office can simply "go rogue" and detach itself from global headquarters.

 

[DavidC1]

The only alternative then is for the feds to operate their own fab.

HAHA and the government will somehow run it better? That's why there's a saying if they were responsible for the Sahara desert, in 5 years it'll run out of sand.

Government is the penultimate monopoly plus it can bend rules to favor itself!

I don't want to see Intel fail but I am also against bailing out companies that made piss poor decisions. I don't know what the answer is.

Let them do their own thing(even to bankruptcy) and make decisions that foster peace.

 

[DrMrLordX]

HAHA and the government will somehow run it better?

The Feds took over GM. Look where they are now. Yes, it was just a temporary bailout, but it has been done in recent history.

 

[Doug S]

The Feds took over GM. Look where they are now. Yes, it was just a temporary bailout, but it has been done in recent history.

That was done that way because of the financial crisis. The US government (and I think the Canadian government took a stake as well) was the only entity willing to take that level of massive risk during a time when the banks that would normally step in either with loans or helping finance a third party to take them over in bankruptcy. But banks had major balance sheet issues of their own and couldn't do it. The government really was the last resort, if they hadn't a million people (between GM and all its parts suppliers, dealers etc.) would have lost their jobs and made that recession even worse. In the end the government lost a bit over $10 billion on the GM deal, though it made a profit on TARP overall. Considering how much tax revenue would have been lost if a million more people were added to the unemployment rolls it was still a win for the taxpayer.

The situation with Intel (if it turns out they can't continue on their own) is not at all the same. We are not in a financial crisis, and bank balance sheets are in good shape. So there would be plenty of banks (along with private equity etc.) willing to take them over as part of a bankruptcy reorganization. The shareholders would get wiped out (which also happened with GM, so that wasn't actually a "bailout" in the way the banks were bailed out) and the creditors and whoever is acquiring them would have ownership stakes in the "new Intel".

The government could put some sort of restriction who can be a part of an Intel bailout - i.e. requiring it must be under US ownership and control. If the DoD "gobbled them up" as you suggested in another post that WOULD be a bailout. The government would be buying shares from the current shareholders to take ownership without going through bankruptcy, effectively bailing out the shareholders who would otherwise be wiped out if Intel had to enter bankruptcy reorganization.

 

[Io Magnesso]

Isn't it okay if America can't build semiconductors?
Even if you leave it to East Asia
America, a multi-ethnic nation, should only focus on architecture
Isn't this a good ending for America, a country that is supported mainly by a non-existent industry called the tertiary sector?

 

[johnsonwax]

Isn't it okay if America can't build semiconductors?
Even if you leave it to East Asia
America, a multi-ethnic nation, should only focus on architecture
Isn't this a good ending for America, a country that is supported mainly by a non-existent industry called the tertiary sector?

Absolutely not. There is no universe in which the US military relies on components being made in a country that we might find ourselves at war with. And there's no reason for that. It's not like the US doesn't know how to do this. FFS, we invented this. We don't have a lack of understanding or talent or workforce or money. We just have an economic system that is utterly divorced from the nations strategic needs, and we've been unable to correct for that. We've gotten this far not because we were strategic, but because we were lucky.

The Cook doctrine applies here: "We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products that we make". That needs to be true for the US as well. We can outsource all manner of things. Who gives a damn if iPhones are assembled in China, or your barbecue is made in Vietnam. But if you can't build a fighter jet because your semiconductors were made in Taiwan and China just took them over, you have a serious problem and no real ability to fix it. And now China can study your semiconductors for vulnerabilities.

The US is not in as bad shape on manufacturing as some would have you believe. We're still substantially more productive in manufacturing than China, and we are by far the 2nd largest manufacturing country. The next 4 countries after the US is Japan, Germany, South Korea, and India and we're larger than all 4 of them combined - and you can throw two more Indias on there. Again the main problem is that the US manufacturing sector is not particularly strategic. One of Biden's better efforts was to make that effort quite a bit more strategic by investing in batteries, renewables, and semiconductor fabrication. Problem is that Intel was already in bad shape when that started and the rest of the industry has no particular investment in whether they succeed. That's why I suggested that the fabless US firms all take a financial stake in a spun off Intel foundry, commit some amount of business to that effort and basically lash the industry together to ensure we have a domestic industry.

 

[Io Magnesso]

Absolutely not. There is no universe in which the US military relies on components being made in a country that we might find ourselves at war with. And there's no reason for that. It's not like the US doesn't know how to do this. FFS, we invented this. We don't have a lack of understanding or talent or workforce or money. We just have an economic system that is utterly divorced from the nations strategic needs, and we've been unable to correct for that. We've gotten this far not because we were strategic, but because we were lucky.

The Cook doctrine applies here: "We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products that we make". That needs to be true for the US as well. We can outsource all manner of things. Who gives a damn if iPhones are assembled in China, or your barbecue is made in Vietnam. But if you can't build a fighter jet because your semiconductors were made in Taiwan and China just took them over, you have a serious problem and no real ability to fix it. And now China can study your semiconductors for vulnerabilities.

The US is not in as bad shape on manufacturing as some would have you believe. We're still substantially more productive in manufacturing than China, and we are by far the 2nd largest manufacturing country. The next 4 countries after the US is Japan, Germany, South Korea, and India and we're larger than all 4 of them combined - and you can throw two more Indias on there. Again the main problem is that the US manufacturing sector is not particularly strategic. One of Biden's better efforts was to make that effort quite a bit more strategic by investing in batteries, renewables, and semiconductor fabrication. Problem is that Intel was already in bad shape when that started and the rest of the industry has no particular investment in whether they succeed. That's why I suggested that the fabless US firms all take a financial stake in a spun off Intel foundry, commit some amount of business to that effort and basically lash the industry together to ensure we have a domestic industry.

America is the one who abandons the American manufacturing industry.

 

[Shmee]

Hello all, lets go back on topic please. -AT Moderator Shmee

 

[Io Magnesso]

Hello all, lets go back on topic please. -AT Moderator Shmee

I'm sorry

 

[DrMrLordX]

The situation with Intel (if it turns out they can't continue on their own) is not at all the same. We are not in a financial crisis, and bank balance sheets are in good shape. So there would be plenty of banks (along with private equity etc.) willing to take them over as part of a bankruptcy reorganization. The shareholders would get wiped out (which also happened with GM, so that wasn't actually a "bailout" in the way the banks were bailed out) and the creditors and whoever is acquiring them would have ownership stakes in the "new Intel".

The government could put some sort of restriction who can be a part of an Intel bailout - i.e. requiring it must be under US ownership and control. If the DoD "gobbled them up" as you suggested in another post that WOULD be a bailout. The government would be buying shares from the current shareholders to take ownership without going through bankruptcy, effectively bailing out the shareholders who would otherwise be wiped out if Intel had to enter bankruptcy reorganization.

If Intel actually goes through a proper bankruptcy and reorganization, they'll be gutted and fall permanently out of leading edge IC fabrication (which may happen anyway). Say hello to the next Lucent/Alcatel, or whatever comparison you wish to make. That amounts to its own crisis for Feds, depending on your point-of-view. Hence the possibility of a bailout despite the rest of the economy not being in shambles.

 

[DavidC1]

What do you mean there's no economic issue? They have record debt in government, business, and personal. And you have the derivatives bomb.

No one will care an ounce about semi after it pops.

 

[511]

If Intel actually goes through a proper bankruptcy and reorganization, they'll be gutted and fall permanently out of leading edge IC fabrication (which may happen anyway).

It's three headed horse race in name currently TSMC is running solo and winning Samsung is even worse Fab state than Intel but they have government backing and X number of business also if Intel goes Bankrupt US should shame upon itself.

Say hello to the next Lucent/Alcatel, or whatever comparison you wish to make. That amounts to its own crisis for Feds, depending on your point-of-view. Hence the possibility of a bailout despite the rest of the economy not being in shambles.

In the end it's going to become the next Boeing which is even worse.

 

[Io Magnesso]

What do you mean there's no economic issue? They have record debt in government, business, and personal. And you have the derivatives bomb.

No one will care an ounce about semi after it pops.

That's great, if you leave everything to TSMC, all problems will be solved

 

[511]

That's great, if you leave everything to TSMC, all problems will be solved

TSMC ain't perect they had issues in past as well they are just executing well at the moment everyone's Times come someday.
As Andy Grove said only the paranoid survives and Intel was doing stupid things for many years.
Intel had issue in the past with DRAMs as well.

 

[Io Magnesso]

There is no "absolute" in the semiconductor industry