Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Wasn't it reported that Amazon was a design win? But like five years from now and minimal volume?

Hiding behind declaring stuff "confidential" is a time-tested Intel way to provide cover for BS. If progress information is declared such which cannot be shared, you can be damn sure there is not much to say.

This sounds really bad, who did this? They out the door or at least on a CAP with 'below expectations' on the review card.

Pure arrogance that Intel thought it could maintain a mnfx lead so EUV... Who was fired for this?

Intel process design used to be core IP. Now the key technology is EUV photolyth from ASML.

Samsung and TSM adopted it two years before Intel. Intel thought itself so smart.

So now Intel plays catch up with companies that have lower cost, 2-3 year lead and experience with contract manufacturing.

There is no competitive advantage for Intel in contract manufacturing. Pat's sheer will and bloviating will not make it so.

It is hard to overstate the fatal flaw Intel is making now.

Our destiny is set, the board cannot acknowledge the error in strategy so it either works or we tumble back to earth in a ball of flames like SpaceX.

Ask Stu Pann at next B-M what the milestones are.

Nice try. There is zero confidential information in this thread, IFS is public and no internal details are included.

I for once after seeing this post feel that company does the right thing by not sharing all the details because folks like you come on forums like these and spill all the confidential information. As much as one might dislike the company, one should never share hints of confidential information on any public forum.

IFS should have some kind of strategic plan with clear deliverables or they should pull the plug...

@Op. The milestones and checkpoints are a good idea. You bring up a good point about Grove grading strategic accomplishments. Why doesn't Pat do that, he studied at the feet of ASG, right?

Fresh news from Orlando Vision, SMG has the inside track to get Ja Rule to be the next Creative Director. It's gonna be fyre!

Tower this IFS 232... We lost an engine and have a fire on board... Mayday Mayday Pann Pann Pann...

That is Stu Pann, not stew pan.

The sinking of the Titanic was celebrated by the lobsters in the kitchen

The tiger looked real to me, but I was in the back of the auditorium. Although, some rumor went around saying it was a fake tiger -- with Eric Kim in the tiger custom.

A real tiger? That's insane. Was that after Manatore (the white tiger) attacked Roy (Siegfried and Roy) on stage in Las Vegas?

@ltf+1mHUdBfK Competitive edge according to RJ is you don't blink and you win and similar hokey pokeys.

Maybe if they got some diversity of people working at a fab outside of Intel things would be in better shape.

Here's the IFS roadmap.

1. Diversity
2. Equity
3. Inclusion
4. Profit??

A Korean boss would make you all wish you had worked harder when Intel still had a chance. LOL.

If Samsung comes to buying Intel, they would likely be asked to divest x86 first, so AMD does not live on as a monopoly. Antitrust saving Intel (in whatever form) would be a pretty ironic turn of the tables.

Samsung buying Intel... that would be interesting... I remember when Intel was much larger then Samsung...

Now Samsung market cap is 3X bigger Intel... Intel has been asleep for 30 years and soon someone will turn out the lights.

If IFS works, I predict Stu Pann will be the next Intel CEO.

If it doesn't, the next CEO for Intel will be Lee Kun-hee, the CEO of Samsung.

(They will buy the remaining IP and fabs of Intel and sunset the architecture).

Actually …. I love this idea

Poking TSMC in the eye isn't really a very smart strategy. Chairman of TSMC also said Pat was 'co--y' and that was based on a meeting w/ the 'jia huo' when Pat was running VMware (and not even competing with TSMC).

When you are behind and losing money, it might be better to be quiet and humble. Focus on creating friends and delighting customers.

Running all over the place saying it is unsafe to do business with TSMC in Taiwan would earn you an 'F' on a business school strategy paper. Somehow Intel culture and board seem to just ignore such foolishness.

An obvious solution is selling the whole lot "for parts and not working" to Samsung and leverage into their ecosystem. Maybe that is why Pat is praying so hard, since he has already managed to offend TSMC. The founder of TSMC call Pat a very discourteous fella (a "jia huo")

But we might have someone who can put some MSG into their DI

Back when Grove was in charge, he would take high level strategic goals such as these and at the end of the year would honestly grade the results.

I wouldn't bet on Pat and Stu Pann doing the same. We'll see.

Also, maybe someone can explain the competitive advantage Intel has?

cost (no)
technology lead (no)
ecosystem (no)
tools and tool flow (no)
breadth of legacy nodes (no)
ability to support customers including flexible shuttle / production system (no)
on US soil (partially, but so is TSMC)
Industry experience in outsource manufacturing (no)
DEI (maybe but that is disadvantage, TSMC has technical leaders not DEI leaders)

Did I miss anything? Seems like many 'NO's and can't find a 'YES'.