I am amazed -- stunned -- how many people here seem to think that Gelsinger was the right person for the job, but wronged by the people who pre-dated him (BK?!) or the CHIPS act (?!) or other conditions somehow out of his control. Gelsinger was -- emphatically -- the wrong person for the job: someone who had been at Intel during its glory days and who obviously believed in his heart that he -- and he alone! -- could…
I don't think you're wrong but the overarching structure of the chip business is very different from times gone by. It's not even clear what "technical leadership" should mean. When Intel was the leading edge volume leader just on their own processor line, that gave them a scale advantage they no longer have and that won't come back. They built a culture and organization around thick margins and manufacturing leadership, what we're seeing now looks like everyone from investors to employees searching for anyone who will tell them a happy story of a return to at least the margins part. Without a cohesive version of what the next iteration of a healthy Intel should look like all the cost cutting in the world won't save them.