Why don't intel just buy Qualcomm instead of allowing them to become the major threat

[ShintaiDK]

hmm well I see what goes on here now, this explains a lot. I mean AMD is worth 6 billion? that would be chicken feed to acquire and put out Intel radeon cards yearly. I didn't realize the law would not allow Intel to acquire AMD.

AMD is worth 2.09B$.

And they offer close to nothing. Nobody wants to buy AMD.

 

[positivedoppler]

It would be called a hostile takeover if Intel had the raw cap to buy Qualcomm. But share prices would immediately spike to beyond anything Intel can afford so not a chance. Intel and Qualcomm could go for a merger but Gov would prob not ok it

 

[john5220]

You already lost your money then. nVidia sits on 71.5% of the dGPU share and Intel sits on 71.8% of all graphics marketshare.

AMD havent been profitable for ages besides a few times.

AMDs combined graphics and CPU division posted a 17M$ loss in Q3. So arcording to you they should shut down right away?

But this does not sound right?

If things are so bad how come they are able to stay alive? Also how come Nvidia has so much dGPU share when AMD has equivalent of what Nvidia has?

Say you look at yearly GPU put out by AMD and Nvidia. GTX 780 is as powerful as a R9 290X not so? differences between both companies are really tiny.

Also AMD cards are much better value for money. I don't see what Nvidia offers that make them so much better.

 

[ShintaiDK]

But this does not sound right?

If things are so bad how come they are able to stay alive? Also how come Nvidia has so much dGPU share when AMD has equivalent of what Nvidia has?

Say you look at yearly GPU put out by AMD and Nvidia. GTX 780 is as powerful as a R9 290X not so? differences between both companies are really tiny.

Also AMD cards are much better value for money. I don't see what Nvidia offers that make them so much better.

It doesnt sound right? Are you saying the numbers lie?

AMD also announced a 13% drop in Q4. Mainly related to graphics.

Why they stay alive? Because they sell out and someone invest in them now and then. They sold their HQ, lost fabs etc. Muabala invested some to keep GloFo running.

The only place AMD got the same numbers as nVidia is if you count all APUs. So its AMDs dGPU+APU vs nVidia dGPU.

Clearly the market think different than you.

 

[john5220]

It would be called a hostile takeover if Intel had the raw cap to buy Qualcomm. But share prices would immediately spike to beyond anything Intel can afford so not a chance. Intel and Qualcomm could go for a merger but Gov would prob not ok it

Ah I see, your explanation is the best here.

Well then from this I suppose the best bet Intel has is to innovate and compete with Qualcomm.

That is to say design SOC with as much power and 34/4G modems built in.

But then the best intel ARM cpu cannot handle more than 13MP camera?
Where as QualComm can handle up to 41 mega pixels?

To me it seems intel is behind Qualcomm by a good deal. some folks say if intel was serious and due to their huge amount of money and resources they would demolish Qualcomm in the morning with a Atom ARM thats better but I do not believe so, the data from what we have thus far does not show this it shows the opposite.

I wonder how serious of a threat is ARM for intel Server market.

I would assume intel is safe in the server market and does not have to worry about Qualcomm since server market isn't interested and might never be in ARM right?

 

[Vesku]

AMD is worth 2.09B$.

And they offer close to nothing. Nobody wants to buy AMD.

It's not because they don't have things to offer it's because of things like uncertainty regarding whether any buyer would retain the x86 license. Also unlikely that Abu Dhabi would agree to a purchase that didn't require the AMD-GF WSA to continue.

If not for antitrust issues and the WSA Intel would probably buy AMD in a heartbeat. Intel paid Nvidia 1/3rd of the cost of buying out AMD just for a 6 year deal on IP. Intel with AMD GPU IP and engineers for a fraction of what it would cost them to buy Nvidia outright.

 

[john5220]

It doesnt sound right? Are you saying the numbers lie?

AMD also announced a 13% drop in Q4. Mainly related to graphics.

Why they stay alive? Because they sell out and someone invest in them now and then. They sold their HQ, lost fabs etc. Muabala invested some to keep GloFo running.

All I know is I buy Radeon cards simply because I get far better value for my money.

For example, I could get a Radeon card thats a lot more powerful than anything Nvidia has to offer in that price range.

Its a no brainer for me. I won't pay more for something that performs inferior.

 

[ShintaiDK]

It's not because they don't have things to offer it's because of things like uncertainty regarding whether any buyer would retain the x86 license. Also unlikely that Abu Dhabi would agree to a purchase that didn't require the AMD-GF WSA to continue.

If not for antitrust issues and the WSA Intel would probably buy AMD in a heartbeat. Intel paid Nvidia 1/3rd of the cost of buying out AMD just for a 6 year deal on IP. Intel with AMD GPU IP and engineers for a fraction of what it would cost them to buy Nvidia outright.

What would be the purpose of buying AMD? What does AMD has to offer Intel that is worth the cost, debt, 10000 (useless) employees. What IP of AMD is worth that much? Its not the people, because those you can just hire. Its certainly not the products.

 

[positivedoppler]

Ah I see, your explanation is the best here.

Well then from this I suppose the best bet Intel has is to innovate and compete with Qualcomm.

I don't know about innovate, but Intel sure is trying to brute force buy their way in.

 

[AnandThenMan]

10000 (useless) employees

 

[Vesku]

What would be the purpose of buying AMD? What does AMD has to offer Intel that is worth the cost, debt, 10000 (useless) employees. What IP of AMD is worth that much? Its not the people, because those you can just hire. Its certainly not the products.

Graphics IP + engineers, full ownership of x86-64, and cat core (did a better job with less than Atom team) with related IP + engineers. The savings in licensing payments to Nvidia covers a decent chunk of the purchase. Wouldn't need to take on most of the employees, plenty of companies buyout others for IP and a few select groups of employees related to that IP. The monetary cost would be quiet low considering how much Intel could sell off or just toss out.

AMD is unpalatable due to:

1. Extremely unlikely to get out of WSA barring a massive extra buyout cost.

2. No guarantee a purchaser would retain x86 rights. Or if Intel with no x86 worries, antitrust issues.

Straying far from OP now, I think it has been well covered that OP is mistaken in estimating the cost of buying out Qualcomm. Intel would have to merger instead which adds corporate and share price issues to the existing antitrust issue.

 

[positivedoppler]

What would be the purpose of buying AMD? What does AMD has to offer Intel that is worth the cost, debt, 10000 (useless) employees. What IP of AMD is worth that much? Its not the people, because those you can just hire. Its certainly not the products.

Please don't hold back, tell us how you really feel.

 

[ninaholic37]

To me it seems intel is behind Qualcomm by a good deal. some folks say if intel was serious and due to their huge amount of money and resources they would demolish Qualcomm in the morning with a Atom ARM thats better but I do not believe so, the data from what we have thus far does not show this it shows the opposite.

I'm curious about this as well. What is Intel's plan for mobile for the next few years? They don't seem too eager to release Cherry Trail / SoFIA or whatever. Maybe it just seems like they're taking forever to me...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Please don't hold back, tell us how you really feel.

Try look objectively at it. If you ever been in a competitive company buyup/merger you know rather than instantly try to hide behind something else.

What would those 10000 employees do for Intel that they couldnt get without buying AMD? Rememebr AMD did the exact same thing several times in its history.

Also how many of those 10000 would get an instant boot because they serve a duplicate functionor otherwise serve no company relevance after the buy?

 

[john5220]

What would be the purpose of buying AMD? What does AMD has to offer Intel that is worth the cost, debt, 10000 (useless) employees. What IP of AMD is worth that much? Its not the people, because those you can just hire. Its certainly not the products.

WOW!!!!!!

This world needs more unions I reckon.

 

[ShintaiDK]

WOW!!!!!!

This world needs more unions I reckon.

Even unions would fire the people. You dont keep jobs for something that there isnt job for.

Same with productivity improvements. Without higher volume sold you axe people.

 

[witeken]

You can hire 10.000 people without buying a company.

 

[TreVader]

Intel is the new AMD. They are already the "VIA" of mobile.


I don't think Qualcomm would want to be bought by a processor company that doesn't actually have any innovative wins in the last 3 years. Sandy Bridge was the last time anybody was impressed with Intel and nobody ever is or was impressed with their graphics or mobile CPUs.


Edit: Since others here have made some rather tasteless remarks I would like to clarify that I don't think Intel's employees are useless, far from it. I just think their architecture is stagnant and the current performance plateau is reminiscent of the bulldozer debacle that prefaced AMDs problems.

 

[AnandThenMan]

There is no justification for calling 10,000 employees useless. And even statistically that would absolutely impossible.

 

[positivedoppler]

Try look objectively at it. If you ever been in a competitive company buyup/merger you know rather than instantly try to hide behind something else.

What would those 10000 employees do for Intel that they couldnt get without buying AMD?

Also how many of those 10000 would get an instant boot because they serve a duplicate functionor otherwise serve no company relevance after the buy?

Choose your words wisely. I wouldn't hesitate to call AMD, Intel, Nvidia or whatever's product useless. or even the entire company as a whole. I wouldn't hesitate to call people in leadership positions of those companies useless either because they are in being paid extravagantly to be in a position that is to be judged.

But 10,000 employees for any company. Theses are 10,000 people who already proven themselves by obtaining a technical degree that is by no means easy. These are 10,000 people who head home at the end of the day with families and mouths to feed. These are 10,000 American paying taxes and contributing to the economy. I work for major company and I would never imagine all the employees from our competitors are merely useless.

Do no generalize and call any hard working 10,000 Americans from any company useless, you got that Mr whoever you are from Copenhagen?

 

[ShintaiDK]

There is no justification for calling 10,000 employees useless. And even statistically that would absolutely impossible.

Choose your words wisely. I wouldn't hesitate to call AMD, Intel, Nvidia or whatever's product useless. or even the entire company as a whole. I wouldn't hesitate to call people in leadership positions of those companies useless either because they are in being paid extravagantly to be in a position that is to be judged.

But 10,000 employees for any company. Theses are 10,000 people who already proven themselves by obtaining a technical degree that is by no means easy. These are 10,000 people who head home at the end of the day with families and mouths to feed. These are 10,000 American paying taxes and contributing to the economy. I work for major company and I would never imagine all the employees from our competitors are merely useless.

Do no generalize and call any hard working 10,000 Americans from any company useless, you got that Mr whoever you are from Copenhagen?

Let me ask you both this. Would Intel need _any_ AMD employees to increase the volume of Intel products to cover the volume of AMD products? Remember AMD is fabless.

How about sales, marketing, HR etc?

The only workers of any relevance would be a limited group of engineers (mainly graphics). Else the only interest is IP. And unless Intel would start yet another design team, then not many of those engineers would make the cut anyway.

 

[TreVader]

Let me ask you both this. Would Intel need _any_ AMD employees to increase the volume of Intel products to cover the volume of AMD products? Remember AMD is fabless.

How about sales, marketing, HR etc?

The only workers of any relevance would be a limited group of engineers (mainly graphics). Else the only interest is IP. And unless Intel would start yet another design team, then not many of those engineers would make the cut anyway.

tl:dr


"Intel is awesome and AMDs 10,000 employees should go find work at Walmart"

 

[Idontcare]

It would be called a hostile takeover if Intel had the raw cap to buy Qualcomm. But share prices would immediately spike to beyond anything Intel can afford so not a chance. Intel and Qualcomm could go for a merger but Gov would prob not ok it

Unlike some mergers where there is a clear "no way in hell" flag (e.g. Intel buying AMD, or Nvidia buying AMD) from government regulators, the fact that the Comcast/Time Warner merger has not been given a clear and present "no way in hell" response from the government suggests to me that the bar is considerably lower in this century and decade than in decades (or century) past.

That said, an Intel/Qualcomm company would be a powerhouse, but it makes more sense to stop short of a full merger and rather just have Intel become Qualcomm's foundry. No regulations need be involved at that point, but a synergy would certainly come from combining Qualcomm's mobile chip volumes with Intel's need for chip volumes to sustain the growing R&D budget necessary to reach beyond 5nm.

 

[witeken]

That said, an Intel/Qualcomm company would be a powerhouse, but it makes more sense to stop short of a full merger and rather just have Intel become Qualcomm's foundry. No regulations need be involved at that point, but a synergy would certainly come from combining Qualcomm's mobile chip volumes with Intel's need for chip volumes to sustain the growing R&D budget necessary to reach beyond 5nm.

Who says they need volume from Qualcomm? Intel is still extremely healthy with lots of growth possible from

* DCG: high margins, ~14B revenue in 2014 with 15% CAGR up to 2018 and possibly beyond (which would equate to $12B of gross income in 2018, up from $7B in '14)
* NVM: $2B and good opportunity for growth http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/4/1/41313_04_intel_announces_3d_nand_design.png
* IoT: $2B and growing at healthy CAGR, leveraging from Client group investments. http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/152336/slide_2_large.png
* Mobile: also good leveraging from client investments, big opportunity (0% smartphone share, some LTE share, 20% tablet share)
* Foundry business: 6 disclosed customers, also a nascent business

 

[ClockHound]

That said, an Intel/Qualcomm company would be a powerhouse...

Do we need moar powerhouses? One or two powerhouses should be enough anybody.

But, what about a Qualcomm/AMD merger? Not a powerhouse or really logical, but it's a speculation thread and it needs to be stated for completeness.