INTC almost breaking below 100B. Right now 103B
NVDA is 575B
TSMC is 429B
ASML is 246B
AVGO is 241B
TI is 154B
QCOM is 140B
AMD is 126B
INTC is 103B
AMAT is 94B
INTC is much closer to "Path to 30" than "Path to 300." LMFAO GG BK BS PG
@3eno+1llyIstq This is why Intel failed for the last 20 years and will continue.
They never had vision nor patience to nurture any business against x86z. Here afia. You have a dinosaur executive from the yesteryear who thinks old Intel can survive in this new world order, they have ki-led what little chance is left
Intel had growing business they chose to divest, NAND, Mobileye... Even if business wasn't so far down we have less revenue coming in as we close these other opportunities out. BS was all about growing Intel's influence in the expanding TAM. Pat is returning intel to the core business and trimming all the other efforts. Its painful for anyone that was working on these efforts and I have seen many colleagues leave to work for competitors.
Swan hated to work as CEO here to begin with. He only cared to line his pockets and leave with the loot
Bob Swan actually got very close to the $300B mark before some sh-----d activist fund holding Intel stock complained about slow growth which is what brought about the current disaster.
It's the "Path to 5" now, as in 5 loaves. It's unclear whether 2 fish will be included.
Right now I'd be happy for "path to $30/share". other hilariously delusional goals/mantras that failed miserably:
b-step PRQ
Data Center First.
Swanny was a BeanCounter. He had no business sense and no sense being CEO.
IDM and IFS model is a broken strategy that will suck blood and life out of Intel and distract management till it fails. The next few years will see talent exodus and those that stay terrible morale, what a $hitshow.
Intel’s problem is far larger than money for both IDM and IFS. Saving a few billions in dividends, cutting salaries symbolizing frugality, nor a few thousand layoffs won’t either.
Factories at the leading edge cost easily 20B or more and need to be huge volume and full to recoup the investment over decades or more. Also the volumes and business must have huge diversity as the RD burn is billions / quarter needs decades to recoup. The x86 IDM is a model from the 90s.
A decade ago the costs as well as scale needed was smaller and Intel had scale and leaderships. Missing the mobile and giving up on it and multiple half hearted and failed IFS when they tried were huge strategic missed and they are now beyond recovery.
Today Intel competes with TSMC which is really a collaboration and ecosystem of EDA, IP, tools and customers that drawf anything that Intel can save a few billions nor the CHIPs act can nurture to become really competitive or have scale.
Apple, Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm, MediaTek and so many others all are part of the ecosystems and customers that feed TSMC to have scale and efficiencies that Intel can’t possibly match with grants no matter how large to become relevant and competitive.
Doesn’t anyone that really care about Intel and is paranoid confront the ELT with constructive confrontation
@jsr+1llyIstq. Looks like someone is jealous.
Intel can easily double if it splits into 3 or more.
Don't worry, Pat will just rename the nodes again and Intel will have technology leadership again. What was 10nm is now "Intel 7" will be "Inshallah 3".
Don’t forget the trillionaires that also use TSMC
AAPL
GOOG
MSFT
AMZN
Honorable mega cap
TSLA
Intel going up against this ecosystem is a joke.