Pat was promising when he started, set the right tone, said right things, but then he implemented the strategy. Betting too much on fab, which has been the Achilles heel for Intel, not improving execution and blaming predecessors. Any other company or any other role, he will be fired by now. Talk is cheap, execution is hard.
16 replies (most recent on top)
Our CEO what a work of art!
“Alder Lake. All of a sudden...Bo-m! We are back in the game. AMD in the rearview mirror in clients, and never again will they be in the windshield; we are just leading the market"
Chip shortage . “My expectation is that it persists through 2024.”
What are the other things he boasts or claims that will soon be revealed as delusional and fanatical
@ 3oiw+1kmBt5Z6…yes! He talks about his dreams, farm boy and stuff, yeah he has come a long way personally to fulfill his ambition of being CEO. But, what has anyone else gained, be it share holder or general employee? Look at BU leadership now, do they look like titans of industry. I agree there was a reason he was not given CEO role first time. What a wasted opportunity to fix things when he joined, now his axx is on fire and there is no runway left for him to fix things. Layoff now makes it even worse.
Pat makes it sound like he was Andy Grove's favorite and chosen disciple. But one curious reality is that Andy was very much actively involved in the company when Paul Otellini was made CEO (while bypassing Pat). Well, if Pat was indeed as great as he claims he is, then surely Andy would have pushed for him to be CEO instead of Paul. There is a reason why Andy did not push for Pat back then -- and we know it now. Pat is co--y and full of himself, and doesn't have even 1/10th the brilliance of Andy. Andy must have known these shortcomings back then when he favored Paul Otellini over Pat.
Agree, Pat could have been last hope. All recent CEO’s at Intel failed in different ways, and Pat unfortunately is failing as well. He will soon run out of excuses on failed executions, oh I was distracted by Chips act, oh previous leadership decision, etc. I see no improvement since his return, except talk and empty promises, maybe someone saw this coming and let him leave for VMware may years ago! IMO he maybe highest paid failure in Semi industry.
@Op "Pat was promising when he started..." just exactly which part was promising?
- insulting customer by saying they are a 'lifestyle' company with a 'little' and 'o.k.' processor?
- saying it would be dangerous for companies to trust TSMC to fab parts, causing founder of TSMC to say Pat is discourteous and co--y.
- ramping up headcount in 2020/2021 and saying in Jan 2021 that growth remained strong. Only to reverse course two quarters later and say there would be big layoffs.
- spending all his time in Washington begging for a tax handout for fabs that won't be built because he didn't stay home and fix the internal drop in market share and margin resulting in massively falling earnings.
- singing Christmas songs at all hands meeting in the midst of massive layoffs.
I'm not sure which part was so promising. I'd say the bloviating and bad decisions would easily earning CEO as rating of BE or IR. (Below Expectation / Improvement Required).
Just like IBM and DEC before it, a company with declining share and margin in it's core processor business simply cannot afford the cost on the next generation process and Fab without the ability to amortize the massive expense over many outside designs. The IDM 2.0 is unlikely to succeed so the risk adjusted return for investing in the stock or with ones career is dubious.... Unless you are given a CEO salary package...
A good strategy is the first point. If you have the wrong strategy no amount of leadership, talent, money, nor political good favor can make up for it.
Now for Intels case they got wrong strategy, bad leadership, poor talent, not enough money, scale, no technology advantage and a history of failed education. What a dream line up of advantages for a big layoff
Intel’s problems began when the tech bubble burst in 2001. We had some nice “dead cat bounces” after that (Centrino, Core, covid work-from-home demand bump) but now we’re stuck with a challenging reality that any CEO (past or present) would struggle with.
@pcg
"Unfortunately for Pat, there was a serious degradation of Intel culture during his absence caused by the previous CEOs. Restoring the culture is an uphill battle that he can't win"
Degradation started when Pat was CTO at Intel
Intel did not groom experts at Intel to be a CEO. They got back Pat who was out of the semiconductors industry for at least 14 years
if Pat left ....
don't worry the sky won't fall, someone will be hired to take his place..
If Pat G. Left, who would want to take his place?
After BK resigned, Intel was CEO-less for quite awhile and eventually talked CFO Bob Swan into acting the role until they could find a permanent replacement.
Bob Swan did not want to be CEO but remained in that position until Pat returned a couple years later.
Quite frankly, I think Pat G. Is Intels last hope. If he leaves then the company is done.
Clearly OP doesnt understand the reasons behind the moves and clearly doesnt understand finance. You cant bet 5B on Fab if you are trying to improve the current fab position in the market. You are losing market share to TSMC. You cant fight sun with candle. So you have to invest way more.
If you dont invest in Fab the death will come even faster. There will be no comp advantage if Intel keeps losing on fab. AMD and others will win out against Intel. Getting the Fab right is the only savior.
The Chinese immigrants I know all seem to think Taiwan will be invaded around three'ish years from now which is scary for the West. If TSMC goes belly up, Intel fab is a serious backstop, because who knows if Emperor Xi will "encourage" the lunatics in North Korea to take out South Korean fabs. In theory Intel could be a fab for anyone, we've marketed it in the past but everyone knows they aren't because its inferior and expensive. Could be worse, Russian fabs are at 90nm which we had around the Pentium 4 era.
History will prove BK did irreparable damage to the company.
Unfortunately for Pat, there was a serious degradation of Intel culture during his absence caused by the previous CEOs. Restoring the culture is an uphill battle that he can't win.
Not sure what the end game is for Pat. Hopefully only one more year of his chaos.