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

U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 765 posts

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#341

Post by andsoitis »

legitster wrote: post #243
andsoitis wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western governments have taken a stake in, nationalised, or owned / operated corporations for a very long time! Some examples: VOC, BBC, national airlines, etc. List across countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government-owned_compa... US specific: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_the...

Most of these were done under duress or specifically for public goods (BBC, for example). Taking an ownership stake in broad daylight for political favors is very much unprecedented in the modern economy.

> Most of these were done under duress

So the Intel case not done under duress?

> Taking an ownership stake in broad daylight for political favors

The article didn’t spell it out or maybe I missed it but what political favors?

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#342

Post by anon291 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #323

So did they buy these stocks from Intel itself? Does that dilute the share other intel stock owners have? This stuff always confuses me.

The stocks were not bought. Intel's board literally voted to give 1/10 of the company to the American government. Any sort of other take is propaganda. The claim that the shares were in exchange for grant money is false. Grant money is free and requires no payback. Congress authorized grants, not equity investments.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#343

Post by anon291 »

wmf wrote: post #79
mikepurvis wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it the opposite of a bailout, given that the US gov't is seizing an ownership stake retroactively based on past grants/bailouts but giving no new money at this time?

The CHIPS Act was the bailout; this is just replacing the previous profit sharing with equity.

CHIPS act is a grant similar to a small business grant, not a bailout at all. It was intended to incentivize chip production in the United States and was available to any company manufacturing in the united states. It had no equity strings attached, as authorized by congress.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#344

Post by devinplatt »

ivewonyoung wrote: post #322
sergiomattei wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What bothers me is the double standard. When the public asks for fully publicly-owned railways, universal healthcare, or any basic social safety assurances—“socialism”. When a megacorporation struggles, immediately to the rescue.

One big difference is management control. People feel that government administered services tend to have poor management and citizen services more often than not. One big example is the DMV since almost every has experience dealing with it, long queue times are almost universal because no one gives a crap and it's very hard to fire a government employee. Or the passport issuance, or applying for permits. Or unemploym…

That's interesting example to choose, as I've actually heard often that the Social Security administration is an example of an efficient government administration.

For example, a quick Google search shows administrative overhead as around 0.5% of benefits: https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/top-ten-facts-...

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#345

Post by anon291 »

roxolotl wrote: post #58
wmf wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bailout; it's the opposite of taxes.

Most of the money has already been given: > The government’s equity stake will be funded by the remaining $5.7 billion in grants previously awarded, but not yet paid, to Intel under the U.S. CHIPS and Science Act and $3.2 billion awarded to the company as part of the Secure Enclave program. Intel will continue to deliver on its Secure Enclave obligations and reaffirmed its commitment to delivering trusted and secure…

No No No.

Grant money is counted as income. It is thus taxed.

If this were really an investment it wouldn't have been taxed.

Forget the grant. The grant has nothing to do with what happened.

Intel's board of directors voted to give 1/10 of the company away and thus devalued your shares.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#346

Post by bcrosby95 »

ch4s3 wrote: post #273
jjcm wrote: post #199

In general I would rather the government take a stake in corporations they're bailing out. I think the "too big to fail" bailouts in the past should have come with more of a cost for the business, so on one hand I'm glad this is finally happening. 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…

I’d really rather we didn’t bail out these companies at all. It clearly creates moral hazard and makes it hard for better run companies to enter markets.

If shareholders are losing ownership it's less a pure bailout and more a strategic investment and/or takeover. It also potentially lets the average taxpayer benefit rather than just those its directly propping up.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#347

Post by mkl »

carom wrote: post #269
internetter wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Global Foundries is on 12nm. TSMC is at 3.

TSMC gets their machines from ASML who licenses their technology from the Department of Energy. The US will be OK.

If it was that simple, Intel, Samsung, etc. wouldn't be behind TSMC. There's a lot more to it than just buying an ASML machine.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#348

Post by anon291 »

naijaboiler wrote: post #11

i remember when this happened during an actual crisis, in 2008, republicans all over cried on the radio day after day, arguing that it's socialiasm. But now, crickets!!

I am a republican. I even voted for trump. I am categorically against this. In fact, he should be impeached for it, and I have already called my representative (a democrat) telling her she has my vote if she introduces articles of impeachment against him. This is a red line for me. My parents left a third world country to not have to deal with this shit.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#349

Post by kaladin-jasnah »

fishgoesblub wrote: post #68
kaladin-jasnah wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Hygon?

I haven't heard of them until this comment, but reading through Wikipedia, and a techpowerup article, I'm not seeing that they actually own a license to manufacture x86 cpus freely. It seems like they were able to due to it being a partnership with AMD. I could easily be wrong though.

From my vague understanding I thought that Hygon is able to build atop Zen 1 IP that AMD gave Hygon, although they can't get anything newer because of restrictions on doing business with China.

Hygon still seems to be making x86 CPUs: https://www.techpowerup.com/336529/hygon-prepares-128-core-5....

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#350

Post by scarface_74 »

andrewflnr wrote: post #337
JustExAWS wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chip manufacturing is too important for the US. We can’t be completely dependent on Taiwan. Nothing against Taiwan, it’s one attack away from being obliterated by China. No company is going to come out of someone’s garage and build a chip fab.

"Someone's garage" is a straw man. There must be people here who could, with adequate funding, build a smallish but viable chip manufacturing company.

There is no such thing as a “smallish” chip manufacturer that can manufacture leading edge chips. It’s about scale.

If it were that easy, Apple, Amazon, Google AMD, Nvidia, etc who all design their own chips would have done it.

Post reply on HN