Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Lip-Bu has mostly been a VC, and has a Finance background, so like Bob Swan but with Semiconductor experience.

ELT has long understood the need to reduce the complexity of the company, but no one was volunteering to get their group or projects reduced. Enter a CEO with a VC background, picked by a Board which is full of Finance types.

Board and ELT indecision has been strangling the company for at least the past 15 years, with the resulting bloat causing many projects to be prematurely cancelled due to lack of funding or a roadmap which could not provide an instant hit.

Kind of like a morbidly obese fab worker having a snickers bar to get through their next period of time in the fab. It doesn't end well.

Bob wanted to slash the organization and shed IDM, but was prevented from doing so by the Board and ELT. It appears that the Board has finally come to the realization that Intel as a large conglomerate is destined to fail if nothing is done, and soon.

The market sees this and that is why the stock keeps trolling along in the low $20s to upper teens, and the Board sees that perfectly well.

When the Sales GM said they were having 'fun' in planning the future, I think he was referring to what is coming. Pat was still trying to hold IDM together, and prevented larger headcount action in this last round of 'fun', and now we all see what it means to remove the forces holding back what everyone knows has to be done.

Finance and various consultants were telling ELT what needed to be done in order to compete with TSMC, and to stop making such poor strategic decisions, and they were largely ignored by those still stuck on IDM.

IFS can't be spun off till it is cost efficient, but at the same time there are many smaller datacenter related product groups who no longer make a lot of sense now that Intel is no longer dominant in datacenter (no need to keep trying to provide an end-to-end solution).

And of course the organization gets flatter, and any executives who still try to hold back progress are pushed out. Complexity is reduced by making the organization smaller and more focused on the core businesses, and that enables the org to get flatter, because there is less need to manage the complexity.

by
| 1411 views | | 4 replies (last March 15, 2025) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jpb23b4q

4 replies (most recent on top)

The quality of IFS is very low, 4 times inefficient.

No matter split or not, IFS need to find root cause to improve quality. Otherwise, no solution for Intel IFS.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @az+1jpb23b4q

Bob was a id--t clown collecting paycheck for doing absolutely nothing. He lead the search to replace BK... and it took almost a year, and couldn't find anyone. And magically, he was the "best" candidate possible on the whole planet to lead Intel? Give me a break. That was a clown search, which took a year and found a clown and paid him $100M+ to sit on his thumb. That said, I would agree that TMG is morbidly obese, and full of liars.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ay+1jpb23b4q

Mic drop

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1jpb23b4q

Breaking up IDM and spinning out IFS and Product groups results in each of those groups existing as a smaller organization.

Executives are compensated based on the size and complexity of their organization, which is the simplest explanation for why there are so many of them resisting change.

This gets to the heart of the organizational dysfunction at Intel, where ELT are lying to each other and to the CEO, because to be honest would result in org downsizing and project cancellation.

A person will refuse to see what is in their vested interest not to see.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a2+1jpb23b4q

Post a reply

: