'What happened to this company and when?'

Many prior threads on this. Here is the cliff notes version:

Intel got bloated and lazy focusing on core business.
Core business was undermined from below by better ARM solutions
Core business demands slows
Intel failed in wave after wave of acquisitions and new businesses starting in late 90s.
Intel internal culture has too much intellectual gyrating with no real output, redundancies, excess process, excess levels of management
DEI policies have created internal tribalism, shunned meritocracy and have contributed to all of the above problems.
Intel CEOs have gone from internal focus (ASG) to external bloviating and demeaning rivals (like saying it wouldn't be smart for companies to rely on TSMC fab in Taiwan) or belittling potential customers (like saying Apple is 'a lifestyle company' and did 'o.k.' on their own processor designs.

I think this is a really good summary of why Intel is where it is right now. Credit goes to @qbp+1kYO1cVE.

14 replies (most recent on top)

@4fgv+1laWbrqA What a thoughtful post. I used to think that the diversity programs were pure of motive and would make a difference. Now I realize that these programs are some combination of virtue signaling, misplaced guilt, illogical empathy or ill conceived with little forethought into the actual consequences. I know so many 'non-diversity' employees that were passed over or shunned because they did not check the right skin or gender boxes. They left the company. It isn't the main reason Intel is failing, but it sure would be in the top ten from my experiences.

I have to agree. Look at the executive staff of TSMC... what do you see? There is no diversity, only highly qualified and exceptional managers who have risen up the company due to proven track record in the field of foundry services.

Now look at ELT for Intel. Yes, Intel has achieved the diversity objective at the highest level of the company. Now look at the BIOs... a large portion of the team is not expert in design or manufacturing of processors... or any silicon pretty much for that matter. It would be hard to argue these are excellent, proven managers who happen to be diverse. No, it would be much easier to argue that the resumes do not qualify for senior leaders based on actual meritocracy.

Some will say this email is 'mean' or somehow I have some bad 'motive'. We I am sorry but these are just the facts. Remember if you put a quota in place and say our aim is to have xyz % of URM or diverse team members and REQs cannot be filled without such a candidate, then guess what. You will get exactly what you aim for. Now live with it. To me though, it's a shame. If the company collapses in a heap will you have really helped out the diverse candidate that you put into a position that resulted in their failure and possibly worse yet the failure of an entire organization. I beg you, consider these ideas with an open mind.

It's simple. When BK became CEO in 2012, Intel started going Wke more and more each year and it reached a crescendo under BS. Now Intel is going Brke. Yes, Pat came on board in 2021 and started to undo the damage, but it's going to take time to get Intel healthy again. The big ship Intel doesn't turn around so quickly, and there is still some "w*ke" rot that exists in the deck planks.

The 90's called, it wants its GPTW back!

@biz+1laWbrqA， @1qac+1laWbrqA， @1miu+1laWbrqA， @1uyl+1laWbrqA
Good threads, thank you.

BK messed it up. lost apple as a customer and lost manufacturing lead

#5 Culture shift possibly caused (or significantly impacted) by higher up hiring from outside seems significant root cause to me.

In 2021, there is reorg everywhere in Intel, this is destroying the company. For example, Ann became manager in TD, and promoted ATTD managers to manage LTD. These ATTD people does not know anything on process technology, they does id--ts and they are destroying TD automation group.

@1qac+1laWbrqA Well said, I have said in the past it isn’t technology having or not that results in failure.

It is the lack of economics and Intel doesn’t have it!!

It’s the inability to appreciate the competition and you can tell by Pat’s talk about Apple, AMD, and his arrogance of regaining technology leadership he either ignores or doesn’t appreciate the competition.

Any questions why the stock is in the $hitter and will go lower and Pat needs tens of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND MORE?

EUV IS expensive.
You need volumes to justify the investments.

PCs have been flat to down for a good 12 years now. Where is this money supposed to come from? Intel acted rationally by not investing in EUV since the returns would have been negative.

This is why TSMC is kicking Intel’s a$$. They have the economics and Intel doesn’t.

It’s that simple. All of this tech leadership stuff is just noise. It’s all economics. Even if Intel get reach parity on tech, they cannot operate that tech at scale and be profitable. TSMC can just fast-follow any Intel innovation and out spend them into the dirt given their mountains of cash.

It’s fairly grim folks.

@biz+1laWbrqA
So, in other words, now that Intel gets back on EUV, we will all be fine soon?

Man you people keep throwing all these downstream issues. Intels problem stem from the re--rded decision to not upgrade to EUV tech quickly.

The Accounting and business side didn't want to spend so much money on new tools and approached decision makers like sohail if he could make 10nm work on the current tooling. Sohail being the yes man he is said yes and then just thought if we work harder we can get our process to work. This decision alone has fu---d the company immenesly, we delayed making a hard decision to invest in our core business.

If there are so many prior threads on this then why keep on reposting it?

About #4: somebody got very rich from these. Look up who they are.

Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

'What happened to this company and when?'

14 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply