Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t know, it sounds like the US gov’t just stole $11 bln from Intel shareholders - while intel is failing - while promising nothing?
It's a similar amount to the stake from the CHIPS act.
And?
U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
21–30 of 765 posts
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#22Forgive me...how is this different than taxes?
And wouldn't it be better to oh, I don't know, enforce the standard corporate tax rate?
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a similar amount to the stake from the CHIPS act.
And?
And fundamentally, I believe that any industrial stimulus should come with a mixture of government ownership as well as claw-back provisions should interests contravene national security.
Edit: cannot reply to you.
This deal literally comes with claw-back provisions.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#24Good. It's very much a "Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point" situation. If Taiwan's NDF has ownership share in TSMC and UMC, China's CICIIF in SMIC, Japan's Master Trust in a majority of enterprises, and Abu Dhabi's Mubadala in GlobalFoundries, then we should as well. The recent (50ish years) aversion to Industrial Policy in America has been pigheaded and ideological to a certain extent.…
The government support should have come in the form of a real competitor. Intel got this way because they had no competition - nobody thought a domestic EULV manufacturer would be an American prerogative in 20 years. All the customers for dense silicon were fine importing it from Taiwan.
Pouring more money into a proven dumpster fire won't put out the fire. This is the protectionist just-desert of refusing to regulate the top-dog competitors into a position where they're afraid to rest on their laurels. If we want an American lithography powerhouse, buying Intel stock rewards exactly the wrong incentives.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#25Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
> How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help?
By ensuring that the US retains at least the ability to manufacture second tier CPUs vs complete reliance on Asia? This doesn't seem unreasonable.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#26Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
> How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? By ensuring that the US retains at least the ability to manufacture second tier CPUs vs complete reliance on Asia? This doesn't seem unreasonable.
The US can't employ poverty-tier labor to enable competitive margins, though. American businesses and global trade partners already largely reject Intel's foundry services.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#27Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
I don't expect a good reason given the history of this Administration, but a reason in my mind to save Intel is there's only 3 license holders for x86 CPUs. Intel, AMD (American), and VIA (Taiwanese). A dead Intel leaves a single American company that is able to make x86 processors, and a monopoly for actually good x86 CPUs. But somehow I suspect there's no logical reason for this besides lining the pockets of those in the Administration.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#28I’m reminded that Chrysler took a big loan from the US government in 1979, $1.5 billion which today is equivalent to about $5.9 billion USD according to the inflation calculator I found.
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#29[flagged]
Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel
#30Genuine question- How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help? Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !? Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?
Yeah why not fund a new foundry startup?