Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Honesty

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#41

Post by dv_dt »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I think this contains mostly correct analysis with respect to hiring experienced talent, but under emphasizes how unique each process is per company. Experience is a positive, but less positive because of it.

There is a lot of potential that could be made from newer hires combined with focused in house training/experimentation - which is what all these businesses had to do in their initial expansion - with not enough people of experience at scale available, and they probably had to do a running training ramp up multiple times over multiple generations of growth. This is in general is an underutilized strategy - esp for mature companies that need to essentially build a new generation of tech in-house.

Re: Intel Honesty

#42

Post by ac29 »

cherryteastain wrote: post #13
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #6

US chip production really needs its SpaceX moment, but it seems like it will never happen, and we're left with the crumbling empire of Intel. By "SpaceX moment", I mean a startup entering an impossible market, where the barrier to entry is billions of dollars of research and manufacturing, a market dominated by industry giants from the 60s, and yet still coming out on top somehow.

The semi spacex moment already happened - it was when TSMC was founded

1987?

As near as I can tell there was nothing particularly remarkable about TSMC in the 1980s or 1990s.

Re: Intel Honesty

#43

Post by sodality2 »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #38
nightski wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

sotck can be low because it's undervalued by the entire market and going to jump once they catch up to the future value potential, or it can be low because it accurately reflects the decline and limited value. If you only see the "attractive perk" from being so low you're the one using historical performance as the indicator, thinking Intel's only a few quarters or years away from former glory days.

Efficient market hypothesis dictates the price accurately reflects valuations. So if a stock price is down relatively, it's because the wealth of information available on it indicates its decline.

Re: Intel Honesty

#44

Post by rowanG077 »

psunavy03 wrote: post #36
rowanG077 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll gladly take another Elon for siliconX. Hell I'd take 10. The good Elon has done in terms of his companies vastly outweigh the few bad tweets he slings into the world once in a while.

I don't get how some people struggle with the idea that he may simultaneously be a gifted businessman (in certain sectors, obviously Twitter was a disaster) and also simultaneously be a raging asshole. Bill Gates was a raging asshole. Steve Jobs was a raging asshole. Larry Ellison was a raging asshole. It's not ideal, but it also doesn't preclude success.

I think that it's actually helpful to a degree to be an asshole to be disruptive in a field. I expect you need a certain resolve of going against the flow. Something which is easier if you are an asshole.

Re: Intel Honesty

#45

Post by bee_rider »

I wonder if Global Foundries will become relevant again on the high end. They “gave up,” but they are working on some pretty small nodes now, 12nm, obviously not what TSMC is up to, but maybe they’ll catch Intel in 10 years. I’m sure they are fine for automotive.

Re: Intel Honesty

#46

Post by bryanlarsen »

nightski wrote: post #30
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

By what metric do you consider INTC to be low? I took a look because I'd be happy picking up some cheap INTC, but it still looks expensive to me.

Re: Intel Honesty

#47

Post by ohcmon »

nightski wrote: post #30
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

You would be surprised, but nvidia’s employee stock plans allow to select the purchase price within the last 2 years https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/benefits/money/espp/

Re: Intel Honesty

#48

Post by rapsey »

psunavy03 wrote: post #36
rowanG077 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll gladly take another Elon for siliconX. Hell I'd take 10. The good Elon has done in terms of his companies vastly outweigh the few bad tweets he slings into the world once in a while.

I don't get how some people struggle with the idea that he may simultaneously be a gifted businessman (in certain sectors, obviously Twitter was a disaster) and also simultaneously be a raging asshole. Bill Gates was a raging asshole. Steve Jobs was a raging asshole. Larry Ellison was a raging asshole. It's not ideal, but it also doesn't preclude success.

The Musk derangement syndrome sufferers do not have the intelligence to see people as multifaceted creatures.

Re: Intel Honesty

#49

Post by bryanlarsen »

zelias wrote: post #8

I like the proposed approach of purchase guarantees here. Directly injecting cash into Intel just creates a moral hazard where they spend the money dealing with organizational inertia than innovating in the space. Plus, the government could even turn a profit reselling its purchased semiconductors to various US companies! The US ecosystem badly needs a serious Intel competitor -- because they just ain't it.

The payments are tied to real milestones like building fabs. Intel cannot spend the money on organizational inertia because that wouldn't get them the money.

Re: Intel Honesty

#50

Post by closeparen »

>Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working for tsmc in Taiwan than intel in the Bay Area. That’s not a joke. Intel are literally incapable of attracting talent from Taiwan right now.

There's some whiplash in hearing constantly how the US is a corporate-dominated oligarchy, and then also seeing trillion-dollar industries at the forefront of the global economy constantly getting their shit rocked by a few dozen NIMBY retirees at city council meetings.

Post reply on HN