Question Intel's future after Pat Gelsinger

jur said:

Pat did some (big) mistakes, but the important thing is that he started changing the culture, habits inside the company. Imo he cut the dividend way too late, he promised too much and some of his talks were barely digestable, but he was technical, he understood things and really wanted to develop the tecnology.

Click to expand...

mzocyteae said:

semi-inaccurate is nothing other than bullshits and fake news.

Click to expand...

jur said:

Semiaccurate is not the only site trashing Intel board fabricatedknowledge. Some people on current board have been there for a long time and imo carry large part of the responsibility for the current Intel position. I don't even understand how could such a board be formed - completely inadequate board for world's leading semi manufacturer imo.

Click to expand...

jur said:

Pat did some (big) mistakes, but the important thing is that he started changing the culture, habits inside the company.

Click to expand...

jur said:

Imo he cut the dividend way too late,

Click to expand...

jur said:

he promised too much and some of his talks were barely digestible, but he was technical, he understood things and really wanted to develop the technology.

Click to expand...

igor_kavinski said:

^^^ You really should start writing a book. Too much wisdom bull 💩inside you

Click to expand...

DAPUNISHER said:

On the stock he helped tank by 60%. Talk about adding insult to injury.

Click to expand...

jur said:

ROI times in semis are very long. What we are seeing now is ROI on BK's (and guys that cut Inte's GPU efforts in previous decade) investment.

Click to expand...

Gelsinger in 2021 inherited a company rife with challenges that he compounded. Setting lofty ambitions for manufacturing and AI capabilities among major clients, Intel ultimately lost or canceled contracts under his watch, and was unable to deliver the promised goods, according to a Reuters special report in October. He made optimistic claims about prospective AI-chip deals that exceeded Intel’s own estimates, leading the company to scrap a recent revenue forecast about a month ago.

Click to expand...

Gelsinger announced his turnaround plan in July 2021, when the company was already troubled by years of missteps in its manufacturing operations, and then embarked on a spending spree. But the spending coincided with a post-pandemic collapse in the market for laptops and PCs, which in turn sank Intel's gross margins well below historical norms and depressed its stock price, sparking takeover interest in the company.

Click to expand...

"The stock lost more than 60% under his tenure, so this shouldn’t have come as a very big surprise," said Ryan Detrick, chief market strategist for investment advisory firm Carson Group.
"New leadership is needed to turn things around and it is safe to say that any of his major strategic decisions are on the chopping board, including the move to focus on being a contract manufacturer."

Click to expand...

The spending spree, coupled with the lack of tangible progress in the company's foundry, created tension on the board of directors, causing Lip-Bu Tan, a board member who himself had turned around a faltering firm in the chip industry, to leave over disagreements with Gelsinger's strategy.

Click to expand...

DAPUNISHER said:

And then Pat made everything much worse. I think the Rueter's reporting laid it out well -

Click to expand...

DAPUNISHER said:

Appeared to lack the capacity to understand the human malware generated income was temporary. And ran things with a decades old mentality unsuited for the present dynamics of the industry.

Click to expand...

511 said:

What pat did we will see results starting 2025 in products

Click to expand...

Josh128 said:

What does this even mean?

Click to expand...

DAPUNISHER said:

Whatever influence he had on the roadmap is where you have a point. But he did plenty we can see the results of already. Every word after what you quoted is evidence of it.

Click to expand...

igor_kavinski said:

Pat's primary job was to stop the bleeding. Once the company had become stable, he could do whatever he wished. Instead, he started this 5N4Y nonsense that led to immense pressure on everyone at Intel and that showed up as their messed up launches and buggy hardware. He was supposed to be their messiah but instead he left the company in an extremely precarious position. The dude really had no vision to fix things in the short term.

I guess he didn't care about the money else he would've stayed and just said yes to whatever the board wanted. I bet his thinking in "accepting" retirement went like, "Hmmpphhh...let's see what miracles they come up with in my absence!". Now Intel really needs to appoint a new CEO with a successful track record ASAP to get their stock price up . Else, their outlook is pretty grim.

Click to expand...

mzocyteae said:

semi-inaccurate is nothing other than bullshits and fake news.

Click to expand...

whoshere said:

𝐼𝑎𝑛 𝐶𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 reports without citing any sources:

"Intel test chip yield on 18A is 99%. 🤷‍♂️"

View attachment 112777

The plot thickens.

Click to expand...

desrever said:

Lays has 100% chip yields in comparison tho

Click to expand...

AnandThenMan said:

If you bought Intel stock this time in 2005 and held until today you've made $0.

Click to expand...

whoshere said:

𝐼𝑎𝑛 𝐶𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 reports without citing any sources:

"Intel test chip yield on 18A is 99%. 🤷‍♂️"

View attachment 112777

The plot thickens.

Click to expand...

FlameTail said:

Does that take inflation into account?

Click to expand...