Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

@2ros+1ocdYpGw Paul, BK, and Bob all guilty for destroying what was Intel.

Sorry the deck is stacked against Intel. Intel won’t be like IBM in a decade, more like blackberry or Nokia

Otellini's biggest crime was not missing iPhone. It was destroying Intel's culture.

“Whether or not Otellini passed on Apple is moot. Intel should have created a solution that was attractive to Android which would have driven those leading edge volumes.”
+1
PSO had a truly id--tic answer for justification where no advantage is generated in any scenario, beyond belief leading you to wonder what criteria come into play for the top job

Intel ATOM was a POS.

@1ii0 OK. Not late to EUV. Just 4 years late to non-EUV equivalent node. You must be one of those marketing bean counters

Intel wasn’t “late” to EUV.

They just could not justify the return on EUV investment given their small x86 volumes (compared to TSMC megafabs).

The root cause was Intel’s failure to diversify into higher volume leading edge silicon - smartphones.

Whether or not Otellini passed on Apple is moot. Intel should have created a solution that was attractive to Android which would have driven those leading edge volumes. They tried with Atom and Meego and contra revenue and all of that, but could not get any traction. They should have done IFS 10 years ago when it was clear that Atom wasn’t a viable mobile chip solution.

@rqd

".....take equity in the company."

TSMC would not let Americans to own a chunk of it. It is the security guarantee for Taiwan. It's senior leadership were faacked out of America, they know the Americans too well.

From the Web:
"Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (NYSE: TSM) is owned by 3.30% institutional shareholders, 0.00% Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co insiders, and 96.70% retail investors."

"Intel is an immigration service provider masquerading as a technology company."

some fool or greedy dirtbag thought that you could replace the people who created this company with low cost subservient labor - that the culture and people were swappable

do you how many centuries it took to get to our current point in technology
there is so much history and culture associated with it
its like they don't know the history of science or how we got here - complete ignorance

Bayesian statistics was perhaps started in the 1700s

"An Introduction to the Doctrine of Fluxions, and a Defence of the Mathematicians Against the Objections of the Author of The Analyst (published anonymously in 1736), in which he defended the logical foundation of Isaac Newton's calculus ("fluxions") against the criticism by George Berkeley, a bishop and noted philosopher, the author of The Analyst"

"They need to know that all they are good for is middle school level math and they have no understanding of complex systems. They are monkeys regurgitating the latest business school book they read in the evening after a few glasses of wine."

we are a country run by sleazy wall street bankers and bureaucrats looking to make a quick buck selling out anything

oddly enough none of them have a particular useful set of skills and if they disappeared tomorrow the US would not miss a beat, yet they appear to be extraordinarily wealthy
while the US is in decline
i think we have some schools where the kids cannot pass a math test at their grade level and somehow this is ok, sigh

There wasn't much doubt inside the company that low power application processors would generate huge volumes with phones, tablets and so on.

The number and complexity of the internal problems that led to WCCG being ki-led go well beyond a layoff chat forum.

Even writing this is giving me PTSD having watched what was going on at the time...

There are actually people who see chess boards and futures as they unfold, all the known pieces moving, all at once. Looks like they’re not at Intel. Not anymore at least.
If Intel was claiming to be a volume company, why was there no confidence on the low power ARM? Was it that difficult to imagine that market prices and volumes move inversely?

All this handwringing. What a bunch of latecomers.

Intel is an immigration service provider masquerading as a technology company.

@rqd+1ocdYpGw Pat will be gone when it is clear that 5 in 4 ain’t going to lead Intel to the promised land

Required reading and you will know how FUBARed is Intel

https://semiconductor.substack.com/p/chip-wars

https://semiconductor.substack.com/p/how-apple-disrupted-the-us-semiconductor-21-02-15

https://semiconductor.substack.com/p/the-apple-tsmc-partnership

Bunch of cr-p. Intel engineering failures is the core of the problem. The company has been taken over by third world charlatans, backstabbers and liars, and the products show it.

This trip down ancient history lane has been interesting...

but here we are. Let's look at the big picture:

1. The company missed the transition to EUV
2. Intel has scuttled most all businesses except processor, chipset and IFS
3. The economic situation is dire because:

3a Intel core business isn't generating enough cash or margin to fund IFS investment
3b IFS would take decades and $100Billion
3c Intel doesn't have the culture, tools, people or experience to shift to contract manufacturing success.

Only two options
Option 1. Stay the course on IFS. Expect to spend $100B. Not enough return from the core business to fund it. You need to go to the market and raise more debt and cut the dividend.
Option 2. BOD changes course. Given the business model, a solution would be to bail on IFS and partner with a competent contract manufacture with skills and lower cost. A deal could be reached for Intel to divest certain fabs to TSMC and take equity in the company.

So I don't give a cr-p if you are an engineering or an MBA, come up a problem statement and solution that is different than this and support it with facts.

And for those left at the company, you have to just put odds on whether you think Intel can succeed in the next 5-7years or not. I give it very low odds. And so, if you can find a job at a company with less strategy uncertainty you might look at that. If you are a scrub and you can't get another off, I would do my job to the best of my ability and sock away as much cash as I can while the company is still operating. I am not talking about quiet quitting. Give it your all for an honest days work but realize you need to be building an exit strategy.

Good luck friends, glad I could help crystalize what is ACTUALLY happening to this company in simple language.

Most American engineers are inept and pivot

So stupid. BK wasn't a marketing or a bean counter or an MBA and did far more to damage the company that PSO. BK was the one the fumbled manufacturing completely.

But typical engineering chud thinking. DURRR MARKETING IS DUM

It's a Load of BS "news" article.
Central flawed assumption is that engineers are incapable of stupidity. LOL
Too many of Intel's recent(last 10 years) Sr leaders were labelled as "visionaries" and it turned out...they were all legally blind! LOL
It's just sad gibberish masquerading as "news".

Shallow article with no analysis of the root issues. THUMBS DOWN.

sour grapes and mental fl-tulence

All the buildings, parking structures, equipment, instruments, facilities, machinery, laptops, cafes, and air shuttles have been there. What really went wrong?

The root cause is non-technical, or semi-technical, bean counters. The symptoms are the bad decisions made and the creatures of Intel created in the environment.

No this article just talks about the iPhone decision 15 years ago. Throws up a big strawman.... what about MBAs steering Intel off a cliff in recent history. Nice deflections tho....

At that time, TD and TMG were fixated on high power PC silicon. When the new groups asked for low power process, tools and libraries the TD people laughed in their face and wouldn't give them the time of day. Nobody wanted to take any focus, resource or cultural changes that would hinder the core IA franchise.

No, the business people didn't cause this problem. If anything, the business people were not powerful enough inside the company to get the organization to embrace and sustain new opportunities.

Yeah what d-mb article. Ron Smith, who ran the WCCG and was in charge of the phone silicon. Ron came out of chipsets.

He has a degree in physics and MS/PhD. He was the first device physicist in TD. He was no MBA.

The premise of the article is that Intel failed because of MBAs? This is superficial and revisionist history.

Otellini lead the company for 8 years, just 15% of the companies life. For 85% of the companies history the engineers have lead the company. Anybody who has worked at the senior levels of the company will tell you the MBAs don't rule the company.

Yes, it is true we lost (or rejected) the Apple iPhone deal. But, it is also true that Apple was masterful and driving the costs to negative margins for a good chunk of their suppliers. Much of the problem with the deal was created over decades before the opportunity came up. Also, nothing much was done to remedy the deep underlying issues/causes the deal exposed.

If there were lessons to be learned out of this, they go much deeper then blaming one CEO and all MBAs. At that time, Intel had bet early on ARM. It was the right strategic choice but with huge flaws in culture and execution. Ron Smith ran that group. The design teams were huge, the product was too large and TMG / TD manufacturing costs applied to the new business were ridiculous and much higher then TSMC. Clearly the cultural and engineering driven behavioral flaws here go much deeper then just PSO.

Anyway, the article is very cute, but as with most things in life the root cause and solutions are much more complex then blaming one man and all MBAs.

Yes it is not some fundamental market condition. The MBAs are not heros doing what they can despite adverse conditions. They are making their paychecks fatter while cutting budgets that make the bottom line revenue. They need to know that all they are good for is middle school level math and they have no understanding of complex systems. They are monkeys regurgitating the latest business school book they read in the evening after a few glasses of wine.

Intel management destroyed Intel period.

@awx No it is more at an operational level. How day to day activities are done. How projects are managed on all levels. Your type of basic analysis is from the same MBA book that put Intel where it is. I will keep it high level and not describe the shortcomings and failures of certain groups that have various responsibilities.

There is still CONSIDERABLE short term thinking going on at Intel, short sighted Directors making incorrect moves and up the ladder it goes. GOOD RIDDANCE. I hope new college graduates and intern they are about to seek from top tier universities understand this is a bullsh-t company with a bullsh-t future. OCTO/SATG are better to recruit locally from Carrington Colleges, Apollo Colleges, maybe even SNHU those are the candidates this company is able to attract. Sh-t attracts sh-t.

Nothing new here, Intel design too big, TMG costs too high and competitors offering parts at prices lower then Intel...

Good story broh.