Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

10 years ago the foundry effort died due to 10nm combined with self sabotage

Intel should put up "For Sale" sign and attract some attention!

Intel had a VERY successful recipe for success due to the x86 software lock-in with the windows ecosystem. As this ecosystem grew exponentially, that allowed Intel to invest into maintaining a process lead over AMD and anyone else. They could also leverage dominance in client to expand into servers due to Linux and their support for x86. The custom RISC vendors had no chance to get ahead of Intel’s pace.

Then, in 2007, Apple introduced the iPhone. It was an entirely new hw/sw platform that didn’t rely on x86 lock-in. Apple and later google/android, created entirely new ecosystems with their own ARM software lock-in. These new platforms grew much larger than the PC ecosystem and indeed replaced many functions that used to be exclusive to PCs. The smartphone platform growth funded a new semiconductor giant - TSMC.

Due to the massive volumes, TSMC could afford to leap ahead of Intel.

Meanwhile, Intel stagnated due to a mature PC market which saturated around 2012. Given the lack of PC volume growth, Intel could not keep pace with TSMC.

Furthermore, competitors could use the advanced process from TSMC to outperform
Intel in their traditional markets. So AMD
Flipped the script and now had a process LEAD vs Intel.

Intel should have seen the flat PC growth in 2010 and immediately switched to a foundry business model to capture smartphone growth and later AI silicon and any future silicon needs.

Instead - due to a culture of arrogance and dominance - they thought they could outcompete Apple, Qualcomm and Mediatek and create their own x86 smartphone ecosystem. This was a fool’s errand for the same reason others couldn’t compete with Intel in the early PC days.

So, arrogance and pride led to the downfall.
It’s pretty grim now as the core markets are under attack and Intel has no other growth vectors. Catching TSMC is a fool’s errand right now as this requires too much capex to achieve economy of scale.

Intel hired some incompetent managers from GlobalFoundries, who are really livers and fake, and good at cheating. A normal engineer in GF cheated to be hired as high manager in Intel.

These failed GlobalFoundries came to fail Intel.

As the article states, although Pat was not handling cost and was trying to hold on to too much headcount, he was more qualified then the rest of the Board combined.

Other articles have pointed this out, that the Intel BOD has been full of incompetents and professional board members for at least the past decade.

They are the root cause and it appears that they have blundered yet again with the mismanagement of Pat.

Pat was also too fixated on trying to maintain the size of the conglomerate, a common failing among C-suite types because their compensation is based on the size of the organization.

But a competent and capable Board could have helped Pat work on his failings and found the right path forward.

The only potential CEO now available to Intel are either going to drive the company into the dirt, or (hopefully) break it up and leave Intel as a Foundry.

Any further attempt to maintain the conglomerate will end like what happens to all conglomerates in decline, such as GE, Xerox, IBM.

Pat is out. Next is to clean up the incompetent board.

Thanks.
Well written and with some depth.

The headline looks like clickbait and the website having a black background doesn't help, but the actual writing is good.

The market seems likely to crash the stock along with a SOX retest, and that should cause activist investors to take over the board and force a change in strategy.

I like the idea of shedding products and focusing on Foundry, because x86 has already lost the moat. One company using proprietary technology can't ever beat the rest of the industry, using open source technology. It is always and everywhere a lost battle.