If anyone at the Board is listening:
Pat had his chance. Instead of fixing what was broken when he joined, he prioritized chips act. ELT is filled with the same losers. The lady running TD is way in over her head.
7 replies (most recent on top)
@2ewc+1i3WeheM
AMD doesn’t have a problem with this.
They are fabless and are valued more than Intel by market cap.
It’s because they use TSMC which is wayyyyy ahead of Intel process technology.
This is the way to unlock value of Intel designs.
Spin off the fabs so they can be like GloFo or Samsung to compete for 2nd place to TSMC. Don’t handicap your design team to an inferior process.
This is the obvious solution, but Pat is incredibly delusional about process leadership. He still thinks it’s 1999 for some reason.
So, what does "Fabless Intel" provide?
A 40+ year old x86 architecture, being surpassed yearly by alternatives such as ARM and others?
Over time there will be less "lock-in" to the x86 legacy/compatibility and x86 will become a "niche" rather than mainstream.
The man needs to realize that IDM is a business idea that is simply past its prime. He is fooling himself and the shareholders by promoting IDM2.0. IDM2.0 only makes sense if it includes a plan to eventually split the company into Fabless Intel and Foundry Intel.
Stock is at 35 - just imagine if the federal chips act bailout did not get approved? Pat's mandate was to set a path to reclaim technical leadership? I do not even see a vision towards doing so. Disappointing.
you are correct. BOD will shake up their a-s once he is gone. BOD would be paying him more than $200 million dollar next year. Mark my words.
This guy has to be fired. He is getting 180 million dollars for nothing. He knows his bonus will go down the drain that is why he is willing to burn the Intel fund.
Intel board of directors are all junk. I don't think they have guts to fire Pat.