Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Did he wear an ugly Christmas sweater and make any new good quotes ?

@1wij+1kmBt5Z6 Your post needs it’s own thread a summary of the chosen messiah who learned at the masters feet, LOL

I too thought that Pat might be bold and visionary and was one who had credibility both in the industry and within Intel to make the big necessary changes instead we got

"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).

by Anonymous
| 1411 views | | 6 replies (last December 29, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1ko4N5gD
Comment! It's anonymous!

6 replies (most recent on top)

The entire company is organized around a legacy x86 with vertical integration as the core business model. The cost structure, culture, processes and product valuation proposition are all FUBAR. I am big fan of the company, but I can't really come up with a playbook that would get anywhere close to fixing all this cr-p.

After weighing it carefully, I conclude the best path is two steps. One, get x86 parallel path up on TSMC (lifeboat and was proposed by Mr Jim Keller) and in phase 2, you decouple x86 from fabs and spin off. The fabs have to stand on their own or fail. In the meantime, you have to cut costs way more then current plan. You cut HC and cost by 30% and only keep the products that are #1 / #2 and high gross margin.

Yes, this is brutal path but a death by 1,000 cuts is really not a good way to go and if you studied at the feet of Andrew S. Grove you would come to realize that the split has to happen. It is inevitable.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @2tgl+1ko4N5gD

@1jfu+1ko4N5gD Kodak, DEC, Cray, SUN, BlackBerry, Motorola come to mind.

Maybe if they fire Pat and get a real strategy maybe we get to have an IBM like outcome. Forget an Apple, Microsoft like revival, not happening with current leadership and strategy

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @2rzn+1ko4N5gD

Agreed. I used to be hardcore team pat but seeing how he avoided and accountability through this whole thing, I hope they can him soon.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zqz+1ko4N5gD

Does anyone see another CEO being able to turn around Intel? If so, how would they do it? I think the cumulative effect of 2001-2022 may be too much to overcome.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jfu+1ko4N5gD

Hiring Pat was the BOD silently stating that they have no idea how to make Intel competitive again. The brilliant idea was to hire a pre-Otellini CEO contender from back when Intel had 3 or 4 strong candidates being groomed internally. PO got the job and the rest left the company. This was almost 20 years ago, a lot has changed since PG was here previously. The problem with this is that PG wasn't here to change with Intel. He came back with the same mindset he had in the early 2000s but that isn't the company or the competition now.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @hsi+1ko4N5gD

Hard to fathom, but this clown could be even worse than BK!!!

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @jxq+1ko4N5gD

Post a reply

: