191–200 of 765 posts
Genuine 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?
wtf? what do you mean, they're like less than 1 year behind TSMC when it comes to leading node
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So no shareholder vote required? It is equivalent to a 10% dilution (shares issued for no extra cash).
How can this be any good for Intel? Why is the stock value bumping 6%?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So no shareholder vote required? It is equivalent to a 10% dilution (shares issued for no extra cash).
How can this be any good for Intel? Why is the stock value bumping 6%?
> The existing claw-back and profit-sharing provisions associated with the government’s previously dispersed $2.2 billion grant to Intel under the CHIPS Act will be eliminated to create permanency of capital as the company advances its U.S. investment plans.
Ironic, Western politicians thought opening up to trade with China would lead to it adopting a Western model of government. Instead it's lead to the USA adopting the Chinese one.
It somewhat makes sense in terms of industries which are deemed strategically important. Intel needs to start thinking long term instead of short term profits.
Which is what the last CEO was in the middle of doing and he got fired just recently because they couldn't stomach it
Ironic, Western politicians thought opening up to trade with China would lead to it adopting a Western model of government. Instead it's lead to the USA adopting the Chinese one.
It somewhat makes sense in terms of industries which are deemed strategically important. Intel needs to start thinking long term instead of short term profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So no shareholder vote required? It is equivalent to a 10% dilution (shares issued for no extra cash).
How can this be any good for Intel? Why is the stock value bumping 6%?
Ironic, Western politicians thought opening up to trade with China would lead to it adopting a Western model of government. Instead it's lead to the USA adopting the Chinese one.
We even have no assurance of keeping private property via civil asset forfeiture! Private ownership was the adults main point of pride to distinguish from the Chinese when I was growing up. And now the Chinese private property frameworks are closer to ours and ours are closer to theirs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Doesn't matter. All of the US's advanced weaponry systems now use "state of the art" electronic systems, which in the context of defense only means "not decades out of date." Two or three generations old is perfectly fine. The military does not need the latest and greatest CPUs and GPUs going into the iPhone 17 or whatever, but it does need the equivalent of the chip in the iPhone 12 or iPhone 8 or whatever for integ…
On the other hand, I wish it were a more formalized process rather than this politicized "our president made a deal to save america!" / "Intel is back and the government is investing BUY INTEL SHARES" media event. These things should follow a strict set of rules and processes so investors and companies know what to expect. These kind of deals should be boring, not a media event.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The promiscuous relation between government and tech is as old as Silicon Valley. I'm fact, it created Silicon Valley. It started when people in China were still building backyard furnaces.
Who ordered the Chinese people to build furnaces in their backyard?