Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 you must be in Intel finance

Using your twisted logic, Intel should divest it's fabs so that way you don't have to count the cost of production.

Actually, not a bad idea since Intel manufacturing is so much more costly per MM^2 then TSMC.

It is not fair to compare headcount/revenue ratios of Intel with TSMC or NVidia. If TSMC sells chips worth 1 billion to NVidia which in turn sells these chips for 1.5 billion. Total revenue is 2.5 billion. But when Intel fabs makes chips worth 1 billion and these are sold for 1.5 billion then revenue is only 1.5 billion.

If IFS fails Intel won't exist in the same form as it is today.

The demand and gross margins are down on the PC business, the cost of adding a new process node / fab is now too large to be able to fund with Intel's declining PC business.

(Disclosure: I/we are short $INTC)

The new round of layoffs should begin in the next two weeks.

What do you mean with that statement? We have ppl in CPM, you are not telling nothing new

The new round of layoffs should begin in the next two weeks.

@1apx+1oikqIZ8 wall street bets Intel fan boy who lives in his mom's basement

Your plan is lame and you are clueless about Intel's prospects.

To improve earnings, the plan is to…

Take back share in server with better product execution.
[Reality] AMD is well ahead of Intel now and most of the new datacenter capEx is going to AI (NVidia).

Take back share in client PCs with better execution.
[Reality] AMD has better performance per watt per dollar. PC demand has fallen and Ryzen has several year lead on Intel.

Establish growing IFS business. Necessarily, this will start from 0 with a large upfront costs., leading to a depression in cash flows until the business can ramp.
[Reality] Intel fails in IFS because: 1) cost structure too high 2) no ecosystem 3) not customer centric 4) no flexible shuttle system like TSMC 5) Stu Pann is inept and knows nothing about silicon manufacturing.

Make small strategic bets on AI and automotive to diversify revenues.
[Reality] Small strategic bets on AI? what the he-l does that even mean. Intel has spent billions on AI. Has no coherent strategy. Leading with Xeon ? ! bah ha hah ah. Gaudi perpetually behind NVidia.

To improve earnings, the plan is to…

Take back share in server with better product execution.

Take back share in client PCs with better execution.

Establish growing IFS business. Necessarily, this will start from 0 with a large upfront costs., leading to a depression in cash flows until the business can ramp.

Make small strategic bets on AI and automotive to diversify revenues.

Nobody thinks that the current snapshot of the last quarter or two is the steady state performance of this business. If that were the case, the price of Intel would be close lr to book value, which is in the teens, not the 30s.

My hunch is that the op is a thousand-aire with no clue how to actually value businesses.

Looks like scenario plans to cut well in excess of 20,000 heads is on the drawing board...

The @Op estimates are a lot closer to reality then anyone realizes.

20k is a must first start as TSMC, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm and Apple all have superior revenue per employee and no way can Intel grow revenue to > 80B needed to support their current HC

Improve earnings per employee and you won’t need to cut 22k heads.?

Earnings = revenue - costs

Costs are heavily dominated by employee wages.

PC industry is not coming back anytime soon.

So you won't improve earnings without cutting heads.

Anyway, stick to your day job because you are not competent enough to understand an income statement or balance sheet.

OP got real quiet after his d&mbf@ck post was exposed by logic.

Improve earnings per employee and you won’t need to cut 22k heads.

It’s simple math after all.

@OP

You wouldn’t need to cut any heads IF Intel could improve efficiency by a large enough factor.

If intel cuts 22k loses will stop? How about cutting 30k to make money?

Who said HC cuts alone would get Intel back on track? Can you cite the post? or are you just arguing with yourself? (very common for Intel people to do that).

Guy who said HC cuts alone are not enough.is correct. Intel needs a process makeover too to bottom as well.

@Op here. I didn't assume anything about Intel productivity. I simply showed how many heads would have had to have been cut to break even.

You are the nub who made an assumption. Carry on though... because I know you will learn from you mistake and some day you will be able to do proper critical analysis.

You’re assuming that each head is as productive as a head at TSMC or Nvidia.

Surely you see the flaw in your logic.

Intel’s extremely inefficient processes are another boat anchor to becoming a competitive entity in the highly competitive semiconductor industry.