Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Reminiscent of DEC in mid 90s

DEC had technical leaders while growing, then they brought in Bob Palmer in mid 90s who was a bean counter. DEC had sparkling new child Alpha then however, most of the revenue came from VAX/VMS that was bread and butter of the company and that let DEC survive for few years until Palmer shredded the company and eventually sold to Compaq while it disintegrated into oblivion

Intel had technically savvy leaders, now brought in Bob Swan a bean counter. Intel has twinkling eyes with drones, IoT, ADAS, etc while the bread and butter comes from X86 PCs and Xeons with no clear direction on where all the new things land, with new leader that direction is unlikely to come. To complete the story, give a few years for Intel to survive on X86 revenues but likely will get right sized to a very different company eventually. Sad state of a great company

by
| 4517 views | | 3 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+Xo2TbJl

3 replies (most recent on top)

My brother (whose career spanned all the phases described below at a single company, not Intel) made the observation years ago that many companies seem to go through a similar lifecycle. When he shared the theory with me I found it to be strongly correlated to Intel.

In the early phase the company is often started and run by engineers who have an idea, a passion, and are surrounded by like-minded individuals. With all that creative energy the company develops a core competency and grows to a level of decent revenue and respect (Moore, Noyce, and Grove).

In a company's mid-life it begins to spread into broader markets and new product opportunities, but is still basically largely driven by the creative engineering teams that have been built over the years. Due to its expanded scope the company now however begins to be run by sales-and-marketing minds. The revenue base increases but dilution of direction begins to set in. Think of the Otellini and Barrett years.

In the stagnant or declining years of a company's existence the leadership shifts to those with a finance focus. Goals and strategies are strongly motivated by protecting market-share and maximizing revenue of product lines. Underperforming lines or those that might have a longer return cycle are discarded in favor of those with better performing bottom-lines, so at this point the creative energy has retired and/or gone elsewhere. I think Intel has arrived.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @Xuxx+Xo2TbJl

As an outsider, I will say this. Intel should do what tsmc does. Compete to take bussiness from fabless companies. Better if intel spin off their manufacturing group just like amd did back then.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @Vtkm+Xo2TbJl

Technology is much faster moving and unforgiving now than in DECs day.

Intel like DEC really has one revenue stream x86 and now has a competitor AMD.

Unlike the 90s when AMD could produce design and architecture innovation to only be crippled by manufacturing today AMD needs to invest nothing but pay just cost and slight manufacturing premium to ride Apples’s bankrolling of each node and fab and with Smartphone softness will have oodles of TSMC manufacturing.

Intel has invested tens of billions on 10nm manufacturing and billions more on design and itbisball trapped and hindered by smaller scale than TSMC and will never compete on cost or amortization.

Bean counter Bob will know what to do and it ain’t pretty.

First move manufacturing to tax friendly and subsidized places like Ireland and Israel and next shut it down

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wlq+Xo2TbJl

Post a reply

: